In the case of United States ex rel. Chicago, New York & Boston Refrigerator Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission (1923), the Supreme Court was asked to review a decision by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). The ICC had ruled that certain refrigerator car lines were common carriers subject to its jurisdiction and required them to file annual reports with detailed financial information. The plaintiff, a refrigerator company operating these cars, challenged this ruling arguing they were not common carriers but private companies providing services under contracts with railroads and therefore should not be subjected to such regulations. However, the Supreme Court upheld ICC's decision stating that since these refrigerated car lines provided public transportation services for compensation on railroad routes between states, they fell within interstate commerce regulation as per federal law - even if their operations were based on individual contracts with railroads rather than serving general public directly.

In the dissenting opinion for this case, it was argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) did not have the authority to regulate private refrigerator cars. The dissenters believed that these cars were not instrumentalities of transportation but rather tools used by shippers in preparing their goods for transport. They contended that Congress had only given ICC jurisdiction over common carriers and public utilities, which they asserted did not include private car lines like those operated by Chicago, New York & Boston Refrigerator Company. Furthermore, they maintained that even if such companies could be considered as falling under ICC's purview due to their close relationship with railroads, there was no evidence of any unfair practices or abuses warranting regulation in this particular instance. Therefore, according to them, ICC's order requiring uniform rates and regulations for all refrigerator cars constituted an unwarranted intrusion into private business affairs.