The U.S. Supreme Court case Pittsburgh Towing Co. v. Mississippi Valley Barge Line Co., et al., 1966, involved a dispute over the interpretation of certain provisions in the Harter Act, which governs maritime commerce in the United States. The plaintiff, Pittsburgh Towing Company, had chartered several barges from Mississippi Valley Barge Line Company and subsequently damaged them due to negligence while they were under its control. The defendant argued that it was not liable for damages because of an exemption clause within their charter party agreement that absolved them from liability for any damage caused by negligent navigation or management of the vessel - a provision allowed under section 3 of the Harter Act. However, Pittsburgh Towing contended this exemption did not apply as per Section 1's stipulation that such exemptions are void if inserted into bills lading (a detailed list of shipment). The court ruled in favor of Mississippi Valley Barge Line stating that since these vessels were bareboat charters and not cargo-carrying ships with bills lading issued on behalf thereof; hence Section 1 does not apply here but rather Section 3 applies making such exemptions valid.

In the dissenting opinion for Pittsburgh Towing Co. v. Mississippi Valley Barge Line Co., Justice Harlan disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling that found Pittsburgh Towing liable for damages incurred by Mississippi Valley Barge when one of its barges sank after being towed by Pittsburgh Towing. He argued that there was insufficient evidence to prove negligence on the part of Pittsburgh Towing, and therefore it should not be held responsible for the loss of cargo from Mississippi Valley Barge's sunken vessel. Furthermore, he contended that even if negligence could be proven, liability should still not rest solely with Pittsburgh Towing because both parties had contributed to any potential risk through their mutual agreement to proceed despite adverse weather conditions and other known hazards.