Ross Winans was the plaintiff in this Supreme Court case against The New York and Erie Railroad Company. Winans had been contracted to build a locomotive for the company, but he claimed that they failed to pay him after it was completed. He sued them for breach of contract and sought damages from them as compensation. The railroad argued that since their charter did not explicitly state they could enter into such contracts, then no legal obligation existed between them and Winans. The court ultimately ruled in favor of the railroad on grounds that there were no explicit terms stated within their charter allowing for such contracts with individuals like Ross Winans; thus, his claim was denied due to lack of evidence proving an agreement between both parties.

In Ross Winans v. The New York and Erie Railroad Company, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state law that prohibited railroad companies from charging more than three cents per mile for passengers violated the Constitution's Commerce Clause. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Campbell argued that Congress had exclusive power over interstate commerce and thus could not be preempted by state laws. He further argued that states have no authority to regulate or interfere with interstate commerce in any way, as this would violate the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution which grants federal laws precedence over those of individual states. Furthermore, he noted that while it is true some states may pass legislation regulating intrastate commerce within their own borders, they cannot do so when such regulations affect interstate trade between two different states without violating both constitutional principles mentioned above. Thus Justice Campbell concluded that since this case involved an attempt by one state (New York) to regulate prices charged for transportation across another state (Pennsylvania), it should be deemed unconstitutional under both clauses of the U.S Constitution and overturned accordingly