In Railroad Company v. McKinley, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a railroad company was liable for damages caused by a train accident. The plaintiff, McKinley, was a passenger on the train when it collided with another train, resulting in serious injuries. The defendant, the railroad company, argued that it was not liable for the accident because it had taken all reasonable precautions to ensure the safety of its passengers. The Court held that the railroad company was liable for the accident. The Court reasoned that the railroad company had a duty to exercise reasonable care in the operation of its trains, and that it had failed to do so. The Court noted that the railroad company had failed to provide adequate warning of the approaching train, and that it had failed to take other necessary precautions to ensure the safety of its passengers. As a result, the Court held that the railroad company was liable for the damages caused by the accident.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Railroad Company v. McKinley, arguing that the majority's decision was an incorrect interpretation of the law and would lead to unjust results. He argued that a railroad company had no legal obligation to pay for damages caused by its negligence unless it had assumed such liability through contract or statute. The majority held that when a party is injured due to another's negligence, they are entitled to compensation regardless of any contractual agreement between them; however, Justice Field disagreed with this reasoning as he believed it would create an unfair burden on businesses who could not be expected to anticipate all potential risks associated with their operations and provide adequate protection against them without being able to limit their liabilities through contracts. Furthermore, he noted that if companies were liable for damages even when there was no contract between parties then those responsible for injuries may have difficulty collecting payment from negligent parties since many do not have sufficient resources available at hand. Ultimately, Justice Field concluded his dissent by stating that while individuals should be compensated fairly for losses suffered due to another’s negligence, holding companies strictly liable without regard for any contractual agreements between parties goes beyond what is necessary or justifiable under existing laws.