In the case of Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. et al. v. Flowers in 1946, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over land ownership involving an insurance company and a private citizen from Mississippi named Flowers. The issue arose when Aetna Casualty & Surety Company purchased tax titles to several pieces of property at a public auction after their previous owners failed to pay taxes owed to Hinds County, Mississippi. However, one piece of this property was already owned by Mr.Flowers who had been paying his taxes regularly and never received any notice about the sale or potential loss of his land due to others' unpaid taxes. The court held that while it is constitutional for states to sell properties with delinquent tax payments without notifying all interested parties, they must make reasonable efforts to inform those whose rights could be affected before taking such action - something which did not happen in this case as no attempt was made by either Hinds County or Aetna Insurance Company (the purchaser)to notify Mr.Flowers about these proceedings. Therefore,the Supreme Court decided in favor of Mr.Flowers stating that he should have been given proper notice prior to the sale thus rendering it invalid and allowing him retain ownership over his land.

In the dissenting opinion for AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY CO. ET AL. v. FLOWERS, Justice Frankfurter argued that the majority's decision to uphold a Mississippi court ruling was based on an incorrect interpretation of state law and failed to respect principles of federalism. He contended that the Mississippi Supreme Court had not definitively ruled on whether or not insurance companies could be sued in any county where they do business, as opposed to only in their home counties or those where contracts were made or breached. Therefore, he believed it was inappropriate for the U.S Supreme Court to make this determination instead of remanding it back to state courts for clarification. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential due process violations if corporations are subjected to lawsuits anywhere they conduct business without clear legal guidelines.