In the Wade v. Chicago, Springfield and St. Louis Railroad Company case of 1892, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railroad company. The plaintiff, Mr. Wade had sued for damages after his land was flooded due to a change in water flow caused by construction work done by the railroad company on its right-of-way through his property. However, it was found that when he sold part of his land to the railroad company years earlier, he did not reserve any drainage rights or make any stipulations about changes in water flow as a result of their activities on their purchased portion of land. Therefore, since there were no explicit restrictions placed upon them regarding alterations affecting drainage at time they acquired title to this strip from him; they could not be held liable for consequential damages resulting from such alterations made within limits thereof.

The dissenting opinion in the Wade v. Chicago, Springfield and St. Louis Railroad Company case argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings of the court regarding similar cases. The dissent believed that there had been a clear violation of property rights by the railroad company when it constructed its tracks across private land without proper compensation to or consent from the owner. They contended that this constituted an unlawful seizure of property under eminent domain laws, which require just compensation for any private property taken for public use. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's assertion that damages could not be awarded because no physical injury had occurred as a result of constructing railway lines on privately owned land; instead, they maintained such actions inherently devalued and damaged said properties regardless if physical harm was evident or not.