In the case of Bell Silver and Copper Mining Company v. First National Bank of Butte, 1894, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendant, First National Bank of Butte. The dispute arose when Bell Silver and Copper Mining Company claimed that they were not liable for a debt to the bank because it was incurred by an unauthorized agent acting beyond his powers. However, after examining evidence presented during trial proceedings which included letters written by company officials acknowledging their indebtedness to the bank as well as other transactions between them over time; Justice Brewer delivered a unanimous opinion stating that these actions constituted ratification on part of mining company towards its agent's dealings with bank thereby making them liable for repayment.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Bell Silver and Copper Mining Company v. First National Bank of Butte argued that the majority's decision was incorrect because it failed to properly consider Montana state law. The dissenters believed that, under Montana law, a mortgage could not be foreclosed until all parties with an interest in the property had been made defendants in the foreclosure suit. In this case, they pointed out that one party with an interest - a judgment creditor - had not been included as a defendant when the bank foreclosed on its mortgage against Bell Silver and Copper Mining Company. Therefore, according to these justices' interpretation of state law, the foreclosure should have been deemed invalid and voided by court order.