In the 1902 case of Texas and Pacific Railway Company v. Behymer, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railway company. The plaintiff, Mr. Behymer, had sued for damages after a train accident caused by an alleged negligence on part of the railway company's employees resulted in his injuries. However, it was found that he himself was negligent as he chose to ride on a platform between two cars instead of inside one which is safer and intended for passengers - despite being aware that riding there could be dangerous due to previous experiences with similar situations. As such, his contributory negligence barred him from recovering any damages according to common law principles applicable at that time.

In the dissenting opinion for Texas and Pacific Railway Company v. Behymer, it was argued that the majority's decision to hold the railway company liable for damages caused by a fire started by one of its locomotives was unjust. The dissenting justices believed that there wasn't sufficient evidence to prove negligence on part of the railway company or its employees. They pointed out that sparks from locomotives were common and not necessarily indicative of any wrongdoing or carelessness. Furthermore, they contended that it is unreasonable to expect a railroad company to completely eliminate all risks associated with operating trains as this would be practically impossible given existing technology at the time. Therefore, in their view, holding companies accountable for every accident resulting from such unavoidable risks could potentially cripple industries vital to economic growth and development.