In the case of United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co., et al., 1956, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether or not a shipper could recover damages from a carrier for losses incurred due to negligence in transportation. The dispute arose when the United States government shipped goods via Western Pacific Railroad and claimed that they were damaged during transit due to improper refrigeration. The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had previously ruled in favor of Western Pacific, stating that it was not liable as per tariff provisions filed by them which limited their liability unless negligence could be proven. The Supreme Court reversed this decision, ruling that under federal law governing interstate commerce, carriers cannot limit their liability for damage caused by negligent transportation unless such limitation is clearly stated in writing on the bill of lading issued to shippers. Since no such statement existed on any bills provided by Western Pacific Railroad Company, they were held responsible for all damages resulting from their negligent handling of cargo.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co., it was argued that the majority's decision to allow a shipper to recover damages from a carrier due to misrouting, even when no physical damage occurred, expanded liability beyond what was intended by Congress in the Interstate Commerce Act. The dissent contended that this interpretation of law would place an undue burden on carriers and could potentially lead to excessive litigation. They believed that shippers should bear some responsibility for ensuring their goods are properly routed and not rely solely on carriers' expertise. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's view that such errors constituted negligence under common law principles because routing decisions involve complex judgments about efficiency and cost-effectiveness rather than simple carelessness or oversight.