In the 1920 case of Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company et al. v. Nichols & Company, the Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over freight charges for cotton shipments from Arkansas to New Orleans between 1917 and 1918. The railroad company sued Nichols & Co., claiming they had underpaid by using an outdated tariff rate instead of the increased wartime rates set by federal authorities during World War I. However, Nichols argued that they were not notified about these changes in time and therefore should only be liable for payment at the old rates. The court ruled in favor of Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company, stating that it was not necessary for shippers to have actual notice of new tariffs filed with Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). It held that constructive notice through publication sufficed as per ICC regulations which required railroads to post their tariffs publicly and keep them open for inspection at every station where goods are received or delivered. This decision underscored two important principles: firstly, ignorance does not excuse noncompliance; secondly, businesses must stay informed about regulatory changes affecting their operations because regulators are under no obligation to provide individualized notices when rules change.

In the dissenting opinion for Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company et al. v. Nichols & Company, Justice McReynolds disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold a state law that allowed creditors to seize and sell goods in transit as a way of settling debts owed by shippers. He argued that this ruling violated the Commerce Clause of the U.S Constitution, which gives Congress exclusive power over interstate commerce. According to him, allowing individual states to interfere with goods moving across state lines could potentially disrupt trade and create inconsistencies in how laws are applied from one state to another. Furthermore, he contended that such seizures were essentially an unfair form of taxation on out-of-state businesses who had no say in creating these laws but were still subject to them when shipping goods through those states.