In the case of ARD v. BRANDON, 1894, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land ownership. The plaintiff, Ard, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from Brandon and subsequently made improvements to it under the assumption that he was its rightful owner. However, Brandon later sold this same property to another party who then sued Ard for trespassing. In his defense, Ard argued that since he bought and improved the land in good faith believing himself to be its legitimate owner at that time; therefore any subsequent sale by Brandon should not affect his rights over it. The court disagreed with Ard's argument stating there is no provision in law which allows someone who has mistakenly improved another person’s property while thinking it was their own to claim compensation or retain possession of said property after discovering their mistake about ownership status. Therefore they upheld previous rulings against him - affirming his liability for trespassing charges and denying him any right over either improvements made or original purchase price paid.

The dissenting opinion in the ARD v. BRANDON case of 1894 was not recorded or is not available for review. In many older court cases, especially those prior to the 20th century, only majority opinions were consistently documented and preserved. Therefore, it's often difficult to find comprehensive records of dissenting or concurring opinions from these earlier periods in legal history.