In Turrill v. The Michigan Southern, &C., Railroad Company, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a state court had jurisdiction over a case involving an interstate railroad company. The plaintiff in this case alleged that he had been injured while working on the defendant's train and sought damages for his injuries from both the defendant and its insurer. The Supreme Court held that under federal law, only federal courts have jurisdiction over cases involving interstate railroads; thus, it reversed the decision of the state court and remanded for further proceedings in accordance with its opinion.

Justice Swayne wrote the dissenting opinion in Turrill v. The Michigan Southern, &C., Railroad Company. He argued that the majority's decision was wrong because it failed to consider a key point: whether or not the plaintiff had been injured by any negligence on behalf of the defendant railroad company. Justice Swayne noted that there was no evidence presented at trial to suggest that any such negligence occurred and thus, he believed, it would be improper for the court to award damages without proof of fault on behalf of either party. Furthermore, Justice Swayne argued that even if some form of negligence could be established against the defendant railroad company, then they should only be held liable for those injuries which were directly caused by their actions - not all injuries sustained as a result of an accident involving one of their trains. Ultimately, Justice Swayne concluded his dissent with a call for greater caution when assessing liability in cases like this where causation is difficult to establish and prove beyond reasonable doubt.