In the 1912 case of Adams v. City of Milwaukee, the United States Supreme Court addressed a dispute over property rights and municipal authority. The plaintiff, Adams, owned land in Milwaukee that was taken by the city for public use without compensation under its power of eminent domain. Adams argued this violated his Fifth Amendment right to just compensation for private property taken for public use. However, the court ruled against him on grounds that he had failed to exhaust all available legal remedies at state level before appealing to federal courts - specifically not pursuing an inverse condemnation action in Wisconsin's courts where he could have sought just compensation from Milwaukee directly. Therefore, it upheld dismissal of his suit due to lack of jurisdiction rather than ruling on constitutional issues raised.

In the dissenting opinion for Adams v. City of Milwaukee, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's decision to hold the city liable for damages caused by a sewer backup on private property. He argued that municipalities should not be held responsible for unforeseen consequences resulting from public works projects intended to benefit their citizens as a whole. According to him, it was unreasonable and unfair to expect cities to anticipate every possible negative outcome or malfunction associated with such projects, especially given their limited resources and expertise in this area. Furthermore, he believed that holding them accountable in these situations would discourage them from undertaking necessary improvements and advancements out of fear of potential lawsuits. Therefore, he felt that liability should only be assigned if there is clear evidence of negligence or misconduct on part of the municipality.