In the 1894 U.S. Supreme Court case, The Oregon, the court ruled on a dispute involving maritime law and collision liability. A British ship named "The Oregon" collided with another vessel off the coast of New Jersey in dense fog conditions. Both vessels were damaged and sought compensation from each other for negligence leading to their respective damages. The main issue was whether or not both ships were equally at fault for failing to take appropriate precautions given the poor visibility due to foggy weather conditions. The Supreme Court held that both vessels were indeed equally at fault because they failed to adhere strictly to Article 18 of Inland Rules requiring them stop their engines and navigate with caution when unable to see an approaching vessel's course due to atmospheric conditions affecting visibility. This ruling established a precedent known as "the divided damages rule," which stipulates that when two vessels are found mutually at fault in a collision, liability is shared evenly between them regardless of degree of individual culpability.

In the dissenting opinion for The Oregon case in 1894, it was argued that the majority had erred in their interpretation of maritime law and liability. The dissenting justices believed that a ship at anchor could not be held responsible for damages caused by another vessel colliding with it, even if its lights were out. They maintained that under international rules of navigation, moving vessels are obligated to avoid stationary objects regardless of whether they are properly lit or not. Furthermore, they contended that there was no evidence proving negligence on part of 'The Oregon'. Therefore, according to them, 'The Oregon' should not have been found partially liable for the collision with 'The Willamette Valley'.