In the case of Third Street and Suburban Railway Company v. Lewis, 1898, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mrs. Lewis who had sued for damages after her husband was killed by a streetcar operated by the railway company. The court held that it was not necessary for Mrs. Lewis to prove negligence on part of the conductor or motorman specifically; she only needed to show that someone employed by the company acted negligently leading to her husband's death. This ruling established an important precedent in tort law: employers can be held liable for their employees' negligent acts committed during employment even if they did not directly cause harm themselves.

In the dissenting opinion for the case Third Street and Suburban Railway Company v. Lewis, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings of the court regarding similar cases. He contended that it was not within a state's power to regulate rates charged by interstate commerce companies, as this would interfere with Congress' exclusive jurisdiction over such matters. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's assertion that there were no constitutional issues at stake in this case; rather, he believed that if states could arbitrarily set rates for these companies without any federal oversight or control, then they could effectively destroy those businesses and thus infrally upon their rights under due process clause of Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore, according to Justice Harlan’s view point ,the judgement should have been reversed instead of being affirmed.