In the Southern Railway Company v. Reid & Beam case of 1911, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Southern Railway Company. The dispute arose when a train owned by the railway company collided with a wagon at a crossing, resulting in injuries to those on board the wagon and damage to their property. Reid & Beam sued for damages claiming negligence on part of the railway company for not providing adequate warning signals at that particular crossing point. However, it was found that there were indeed two signs indicating an approaching railroad crossing which had been ignored by Reid & Beam's driver who also failed to stop before proceeding across as required by North Carolina law under which this incident occurred. Therefore, it was concluded that they did not exercise due care and caution while approaching and traversing through such crossings where trains are frequently passing or standing thus leading them into danger themselves.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Southern Railway Company v. Reid & Beam argued that the majority's decision to hold the railway company liable for damages was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that there was insufficient evidence to prove negligence on part of the railway company, and thus they should not be held responsible for injuries sustained by Reid & Beam's employees during a collision between two trains. They contended that it is unreasonable to expect companies to anticipate every possible accident scenario and take preventative measures accordingly; instead, liability should only arise when a company fails to exercise reasonable care under known circumstances. This viewpoint emphasizes an interpretation of law where businesses are protected from excessive litigation unless clear proof of negligence can be demonstrated.