In the case of Bassing v. Cady (1907), the United States Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in St. Louis, Missouri. The plaintiff, Bassing, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from its original owner and was therefore entitled to it. However, the defendant, Cady - who held a tax title on the same property - argued that his claim was superior because Bassing's purchase did not include all necessary legal formalities and thus was invalid under Missouri law. The court ruled in favor of Cady stating that while there were irregularities in how he obtained his tax title; these irregularities did not invalidate his claim as they were minor procedural issues rather than substantive ones affecting ownership rights directly. Furthermore, since Bassing failed to follow proper procedure when purchasing the property originally (i.e., failing to record his deed), this made him an "equitable" rather than "legal" owner which put him at disadvantage against someone like Cady who held a valid legal title even if acquired through tax sale process.

The dissenting opinion in the Bassing v. Cady case argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling, which found Mr. Bassing guilty of contempt for refusing to answer certain questions during a grand jury investigation, was incorrect. The dissent contended that the questions asked were not pertinent to any matter under inquiry by the grand jury and thus violated Mr. Bassing's Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. They believed that it is essential for courts to protect individuals from being compelled into making disclosures about their private affairs unless such information is directly relevant and necessary for justice administration in an ongoing legal proceeding.