In the Bier v. McGehee case of 1892, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land ownership in New Orleans. The plaintiff, Bier, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from one Mr. Bringier who had acquired it through inheritance from his father's estate. However, the defendant, McGehee argued that she was entitled to this property as part of her late husband’s estate and accused Bringier of fraudulently obtaining it by manipulating his father's will which did not include him as an heir for this particular asset. The court found no evidence supporting McGehee’s claim about fraudulent manipulation or any irregularities in how Bringier obtained possession over the disputed land parcel from his father's estate. Therefore, they upheld Bier’s right to retain ownership based on his purchase agreement with Bringier. This ruling reinforced legal principles regarding real-estate transactions and inheritance rights while emphasizing due diligence during such transfers to prevent potential disputes.

In the dissenting opinion for Bier v. McGehee, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision to uphold a Louisiana law prohibiting non-residents from hunting or fishing on privately owned lands was in violation of the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV of the Constitution. He contended that this clause guarantees citizens who are not residents equal rights with those who are, including access to natural resources such as fish and game. The justice further asserted that if states were allowed to discriminate against non-residents in this manner, it could lead to a fragmentation of national unity by allowing each state to create its own exclusive privileges for its citizens at the expense of others'. In his view, such discrimination is contrary to both constitutional principles and American ideals about equality among all citizens regardless their residence status.