In the case of Tipton v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co., 1935, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a railway company could be held liable for injuries sustained by an employee during his off-duty hours while on company property. Mr. Tipton was injured when he fell into a hole in a poorly lit area of the premises where he lived and worked as part of his employment agreement with Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company (AT&SF). The court ruled that AT&SF owed its employees "a duty to exercise ordinary care" to maintain safe conditions on its premises regardless if they were working or not at any given time. Therefore, it found that AT&SF had breached this duty and upheld lower courts' decisions awarding damages to Mr.Tipton for his injury.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Tipton v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co., argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and misinterpreted the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA). The dissent believed that under FELA, a railroad worker injured on duty could sue their employer for damages even if they were partially at fault for their injuries. They contended that this principle should apply to Tipton's case as well, despite his alleged negligence contributing to his injury. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority’s view about contributory negligence being an absolute defense under Kansas law where the accident happened; instead arguing it merely reduced recovery proportionate to plaintiff’s fault. Thus, according to them, Tipton should have been allowed compensation from Atchison railway company regardless of whether he was partly responsible for his own harm.