In the case of Ralston Purina Co. et al. v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. et al., 1975, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with deciding whether a railroad company could be held liable for damages to goods during transit under the Carmack Amendment to the Interstate Commerce Act, even if it had not been negligent in its duties and regardless of any contractual agreements limiting liability between shipper and carrier. The court ruled in favor of Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, stating that while carriers are generally responsible for damage or loss during transport under common law principles, they can limit their liability through "reasonable" contracts agreed upon by both parties involved as long as such limitations do not absolve them from all responsibility or accountability.

In the dissenting opinion for Ralston Purina Co. et al. v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. et al., Justice Brennan, joined by Justices Stewart and Marshall, argued that the majority's decision to allow railroads to unilaterally change their rates without first seeking approval from the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) was a misinterpretation of federal law and precedent. They contended that this ruling undermined Congress' intent in creating the ICC as a regulatory body with oversight over rate changes, which could potentially lead to unchecked price increases detrimental to shippers like Ralston Purina Company who rely on fair pricing for their business operations.