Railway Company v. Prescott was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1872. The case involved a dispute between the Railway Company and Prescott, a passenger on the company's train. Prescott had purchased a ticket for a one-way trip from one station to another, but the train stopped at an intermediate station and Prescott disembarked there. The Railway Company sued Prescott for the full fare, arguing that he had breached the contract by not completing the journey. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Prescott, finding that the contract was for a one-way trip and that Prescott had fulfilled his obligations by disembarking at the intermediate station. The Court held that the Railway Company could not collect the full fare for a journey that was not completed. The Court also noted that the Railway Company had not suffered any damages as a result of Prescott's actions, and thus could not collect any compensation. This case established an important precedent in contract law, as it established that a party cannot be held liable for breach of contract if they have fulfilled their obligations under the contract. This case also established that a party cannot collect damages for a breach of contract if they have not suffered any losses as a result of the breach.

In the case of Railway Company v. Prescott, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a railway company could be held liable for damages caused by its negligence in failing to provide adequate safety measures on its trains. The majority opinion found that the railway company was not liable because it had taken reasonable steps to ensure passenger safety and there were no laws requiring additional precautions at the time of injury. However, Justice Field dissented from this ruling and argued that while there may have been no specific law mandating certain safety measures, common law principles should still apply in such cases and hold companies accountable for their negligent actions or omissions which result in harm to others. He further stated that if companies are allowed to escape liability simply because they did not violate any particular statute then public welfare would suffer as people would lack incentive to take proper care when engaging in activities which can cause harm or loss of life.