In the 1898 case of Texas and Pacific Railway Company v. Clayton, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railway company. The dispute arose when Clayton claimed that he had been injured due to negligence on part of the railway company's employees while he was a passenger on one of their trains. He sought damages for his injuries from Texas and Pacific Railway Company under federal law which held common carriers liable for any harm caused by their negligence or mismanagement. The court, however, found no evidence proving that such negligence occurred or contributed to Clayton’s injury. It was determined that Mr.Clayton himself acted negligently by choosing to ride between two cars rather than inside them where seats were available - an action contrary to rules set out by the carrier for passengers' safety. Therefore, it concluded that since there was no breach in duty owed by Texas and Pacific Railway Company towards its passengers as per federal laws governing interstate commerce at that time; they could not be held responsible for injuries sustained due to actions taken against advised safety measures.

In the dissenting opinion for Texas and Pacific Railway Company v. Clayton, Justice Harlan disagreed with the majority's decision that a railroad company could not be held liable for injuries sustained by an employee due to negligence of another employee at equal level. He argued that this ruling was inconsistent with previous decisions made by the court in similar cases involving employer liability. According to him, if a corporation hires employees who are incompetent or careless, it should bear responsibility when their actions cause harm to others within its employment. The principle of 'fellow servant rule', he contended, does not apply where corporations have control over selection and retention of their workers; they must ensure safety standards are met in order to protect all employees from potential harm caused by coworkers' negligence.