In the 1892 case of Ankeney v. Hannon, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in California. The plaintiff, Ankeney, claimed that he had purchased a tract of land from an individual who had obtained it through preemption rights under federal law. However, before this purchase was made official by patent deed from the government to said individual (the preemptor), another person named Hannon filed for and received a homestead claim on part of this same property. When both parties attempted to assert their claims to the disputed portion of land in court, it was ruled that since Hannon's homestead application was approved prior to issuance of any patent deed confirming sale or transfer from preemptor to Ankeney - despite his earlier payment for such - legal title remained with Hannon as per Homestead Act provisions granting priority right over unpatented lands even if they were previously sold privately without proper conveyance procedures being followed.

The dissenting opinion in the Ankney v. Hannon case argued that the majority's decision was incorrect because it failed to consider certain key aspects of property law. The dissenting justices believed that a person who purchases land with notice of an existing lease has no right to evict the tenant before their lease expires, even if they were not party to the original agreement. They contended that this principle should apply regardless of whether or not there is a written record of said lease, as long as its existence can be proven by other means such as oral testimony or possession and use of the property by tenants. Furthermore, they disagreed with how lower courts had handled evidence related to these matters during trial proceedings and felt those errors warranted reversal on appeal.