In Railway Company v. Alling, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a railway company was liable for damages caused by a train accident. The plaintiff, Alling, was a passenger on the train when it collided with another train, resulting in serious injuries. Alling sued the railway company, claiming that the company was negligent in its operation of the train. The Supreme Court held that the railway company was liable for the damages caused by the accident. The Court reasoned that the railway company had a duty to exercise reasonable care in the operation of its trains, and that it had breached this duty by failing to take proper precautions to prevent the accident. The Court also held that the railway company was liable for the damages caused by the accident, regardless of whether the accident was caused by the negligence of the railway company or the negligence of the other train. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the railway company was liable for the damages caused by the train accident, and that the company had breached its duty to exercise reasonable care in the operation of its trains.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Railway Company v. Alling, arguing that the majority's decision was contrary to both law and justice. He argued that a contract between two parties should be enforced according to its terms unless there is fraud or mistake involved, which he did not believe was present in this case. The plaintiff had agreed to pay for damages caused by his cattle trespassing on railroad property; however, when payment became due, he refused and instead sued for an injunction against further trespass of his cattle onto the railroad's land. Justice Field believed that since no fraud or mistake existed in this situation, it would be unjust for courts to interfere with contracts made between individuals who are competent and free from any duress or coercion at the time of making them. Furthermore, Justice Field argued that if such interference were allowed then all private contracts could become subject to judicial scrutiny whenever one party wished it so - something which would lead only chaos within society as a whole.