In the 1893 case of Primrose v. Western Union Telegraph Company, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Western Union. The plaintiff, Mr. Primrose, had sent a telegram via Western Union to purchase stocks but due to an error by the telegraph company, his message was not delivered on time and he subsequently lost money when stock prices increased before he could make his purchase. He sued for damages caused by this delay. The court held that since there was no malice or fraud involved from the side of Western Union and considering it as a common carrier (a private or public service providing transportation), its liability should be limited only up to negligence standards rather than strict liability which is applied for intentional torts or inherently dangerous activities. This decision established that telegraph companies were not liable for mistakes made without malicious intent nor would they be responsible beyond their control such as errors occurring over wires unless specific insurance against such risks has been purchased by customers.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Primrose v. Western Union Telegraph Company argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and principles established by the court. The dissent emphasized that a telegraph company should be considered as a common carrier, similar to railroads or other transportation companies, which are held to strict liability for any damages resulting from their failure to perform duties. They disagreed with the majority’s view that telegraph companies were not liable for mistakes unless negligence could be proven. Furthermore, they pointed out inconsistencies in how different types of messages were treated under this ruling - while social messages had no guaranteed delivery time, business-related ones did have such guarantees despite both being transmitted through same means and processes. This distinction seemed arbitrary and unfair according to them.