In the 1942 case of Tiller v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co., the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendant, Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company. The plaintiff, Tiller, was an executor for a deceased employee who had been killed while working on one of the company's trains due to alleged negligence by his employer. He sought compensation under Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). However, it was found that at the time of death, he was not engaged in interstate commerce - a requirement for FELA claims - but rather intrastate commerce as he was moving cars within South Carolina only and not across state lines. Therefore, his claim did not fall under federal jurisdiction and could not be compensated under FELA. This decision clarified that employees must be involved in interstate activities at their time of injury or death to qualify for protection and benefits provided by FELA.

In the dissenting opinion for Tiller v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co., Justice Frank Murphy argued that the majority's decision was based on an overly narrow interpretation of federal law, specifically the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). He contended that FELA should be interpreted broadly to protect workers and compensate them for injuries sustained on the job. According to Justice Murphy, this broad interpretation is consistent with both congressional intent and previous court decisions interpreting FELA. He also criticized the majority's reliance on state laws in their decision-making process, arguing that it undermines uniformity in federal law application across states. Ultimately, he believed that by ruling against Tiller - a worker who lost his leg while working for Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co., - they were denying him just compensation under FELA and failing to uphold its purpose: protecting railroad workers from harm caused by negligence or wrongdoing of their employers.