In the case of Transamerican Freight Lines, Inc. v. Brada Miller Freight Systems, Inc., et al., 1975, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a carrier could limit its liability for damage to goods in transit by contractually agreeing on a lower value than their actual worth. The dispute arose when Transamerican Freight Lines transported machinery for Brada Miller and it got damaged during transportation. However, prior to shipping, both parties had agreed that any potential liability would be limited based on a reduced valuation of the cargo's worth. The court ruled in favor of Transamerican Freight Lines stating that under federal law (the Carmack Amendment), carriers are allowed to limit their liability through contractual agreements as long as they offer shippers different rates corresponding to different levels of assumed responsibility for damages incurred during shipment. Therefore, since Brada Miller chose a lower rate which corresponded with less coverage from the carrier’s side against possible damages or losses; hence they couldn't claim more than what was agreed upon.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Transamerican Freight Lines, Inc. v. Brada Miller Freight Systems, Inc., Justice William O. Douglas argued that the majority's decision to allow a carrier to limit its liability through a "released rates" clause was contrary to public policy and inconsistent with previous court rulings on similar matters. He contended that such clauses were inherently unfair as they allowed carriers to escape full liability for any damage or loss caused during transportation, regardless of their negligence or fault in causing such damage or loss. Furthermore, he pointed out that these clauses often resulted in shippers being inadequately compensated for their losses due to them not understanding the implications of agreeing to released rates when signing shipping contracts.