In Sage v. Memphis and Little Rock Railroad Company, 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, Sage, was a passenger on the train when it collided with another train, resulting in serious injuries. Sage sued the railroad company, claiming that the company was negligent in its operation of the train. The Supreme Court held that the railroad company was liable for the damages caused by the accident. The Court found that the railroad 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 railroad company was liable for the damages caused by the accident, even though the accident was caused by the negligence of another train operator. The Court's decision in Sage v. Memphis and Little Rock Railroad Company established that railroad companies are liable for damages caused by their negligence in the operation of their trains. This decision has been cited in numerous cases since then, and has been used to establish the legal principle that companies have a duty to exercise reasonable care in the operation of their businesses.

In Sage v. Memphis and Little Rock Railroad Company, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a railroad company could be held liable for damages caused by its negligence in failing to provide sufficient brakes on one of its cars. Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion, arguing that while it is true that railroads have an obligation to exercise reasonable care in providing safe transportation for their passengers and cargo, this does not mean they are absolutely liable for any harm resulting from their failure to do so. He argued that there must be some degree of fault or negligence on behalf of the railroad before liability can attach; otherwise, every accident would result in liability regardless of how minor or unavoidable it may have been. Furthermore, he noted that if absolute liability were imposed upon railroads without regard to fault or negligence then such companies would be unable to operate due to fear of being sued at all times. For these reasons Justice Field concluded his dissent by stating that no action should lie against the defendant railroad unless there was evidence showing actual fault or negligence on its part with respect to providing adequate safety measures for its passengers and cargo.