In the case of Adkins v. Arnold in 1914, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership and inheritance rights. The plaintiff, Adkins, claimed that he was entitled to certain lands as an heir of his deceased father who had owned them before his death. However, these lands were sold by the defendant Arnold under a deed executed by Adkin's mother after her husband’s death without any legal authority from her late husband or son (Adkins). The court ruled in favor of Arnold stating that although it is true that a wife cannot convey real estate during coverture without joining her husband in the deed; however, she can do so after his death if she has not been endowed or otherwise legally restricted from doing so. Therefore since there was no evidence showing such restriction on Mrs.Adkin's part at time of sale ,the transaction made by her stands valid . This decision established important precedents regarding property rights and inheritance laws.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Adkins v. Arnold, 1914, argued that the majority's decision to uphold a law prohibiting corporations from employing workers for more than nine hours per day was an overreach of judicial power and violated individual liberty. The dissenters believed that it is not within the purview of courts or legislatures to regulate labor contracts between consenting adults unless there are clear reasons related to public health or safety. They contended that such laws infringe upon personal freedom and economic liberty by dictating terms under which individuals can sell their labor. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential negative impacts on businesses due to increased costs associated with reduced working hours without corresponding increases in productivity or efficiency.