Steamboat Niagara v. Van Pelt was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1854. The dispute involved two steamboats, Steamboat Niagara and Steamboat Van Pelt, that collided on Lake Erie while attempting to pass each other. Both boats were damaged as a result of the collision and both parties sought damages from one another for negligence in causing the accident. The court ultimately found that both vessels had been negligent but held that neither party should be liable because they had acted with equal fault; thus, no damages would be awarded to either side. This ruling established an important legal precedent known as “comparative negligence” which states that when two or more parties are at fault for an incident, their respective liabilities will be determined based on their relative degree of culpability rather than awarding all liability to one party alone regardless of how small their contribution may have been towards causing it.

In Steamboat Niagara v. Van Pelt, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a steamboat captain could be held liable for damages caused by his negligence in failing to properly secure cargo on board his vessel. The majority of justices found that the captain had not acted negligently and therefore could not be held responsible for any damage caused by his failure to secure the cargo. However, Justice McLean dissented from this opinion, arguing that captains should have a duty of care when it comes to securing their vessels' cargoes and should be held accountable if they fail in this regard. He argued further that since there is no specific law governing such matters, common law principles must apply which would hold captains liable for any damage resulting from their negligence or lack of due care with respect to securing their vessels' cargoes.