In the 1893 case of Balkam v. Woodstock Iron Company, the United States Supreme Court addressed a dispute over land ownership and mineral rights in Alabama. The plaintiff, Balkam, claimed that he had purchased property from an individual who had obtained it through a tax sale. However, the defendant company argued that they owned the property due to previous purchases from other parties who held valid titles before any tax sales occurred. The court ruled in favor of Woodstock Iron Company stating that their title was superior because it predated any subsequent tax sales which were deemed invalid as they did not follow proper procedures under state law at that time - specifically failing to provide adequate notice to original owners about unpaid taxes and impending sales. This ruling reinforced legal principles regarding real estate transactions and emphasized adherence to procedural requirements for such transfers.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Balkam v. Woodstock Iron Company argued that the majority's decision was incorrect because it failed to properly interpret Alabama law regarding mining rights and property ownership. The dissent believed that under Alabama law, a landowner retains all mineral rights unless they are explicitly sold or transferred. In this case, there was no clear evidence showing such an explicit transfer of mineral rights from Balkam to Woodstock Iron Company. Therefore, according to the dissenting justices, Balkam should still retain his right to mine iron ore on his property despite selling part of his land surface area to another party for farming purposes only. They also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "minerals" as including iron ore deposits located deep underground which were not known at the time when original sale transaction occurred between both parties involved in this dispute.