The U.S. Supreme Court case Texas & Pacific Railway Company v. Rosborough in 1914 revolved around a dispute over land ownership between the railway company and Mr. Rosborough, who claimed he had purchased the contested property from an individual named Smith, who allegedly bought it from another person named Williams. The railway company argued that they owned the land through a grant given to them by Congress under an Act of March 3rd, 1871 which provided for "the construction of railroads in certain territories." However, this was disputed as there were questions about whether or not Williams ever legally owned the property to begin with due to potential issues with his original patent claim on said land. The court ruled in favor of Texas & Pacific Railway Company stating that even if there were irregularities or fraud involved in obtaining patents for public lands originally granted by Congress (as alleged against Williams), such matters could only be addressed directly by United States government itself and not private individuals like Mr.Rosborough via lawsuits against subsequent purchasers like Smith or entities such as Texas & Pacific Railway Co., thereby affirming their title over disputed parcel.

In the dissenting opinion for Texas & Pacific Railway Company v. Rosborough, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's decision to reverse a judgment in favor of Rosborough. He argued that there was no error made by the lower court and thus, no reason to overturn their ruling. According to him, it was not necessary for Rosborough to prove negligence on part of the railway company as they were already liable under federal law due to failure in providing safe transportation which resulted in injury or death of livestock being transported across state lines. The statute imposed absolute liability unless exceptions applied - none of which were applicable here according to Justice Holmes' interpretation. Therefore, he believed that this case should have been affirmed rather than reversed.