In the 1904 case of Bonin v. Gulf Company, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Louisiana. The plaintiff, Bonin, claimed that he had purchased a tract of land from one Mr. Voorhies who allegedly owned it through an old Spanish grant which was confirmed by Congress in 1822 to his ancestor named Delesdenier. However, this claim was contested by the defendant company (Gulf Company) on grounds that they were rightful owners due to their purchase of tax title deeds for said property after it had been sold at public auction for non-payment of taxes by previous owner Voorhies. The court ruled against Bonin stating that despite having evidence proving his chain-of-title back to Delesdenier's original grant and subsequent confirmation act by Congress; he failed to provide sufficient proof showing transfer from Delesdenier’s heirs or legal representatives down to Voorhies thereby creating gaps in his chain-of-title. Furthermore, since there were no records indicating any challenge or protest made during Gulf Company's acquisition process via tax sales - these transactions were deemed valid thus making them lawful owners instead.

In the dissenting opinion for Bonin v. Gulf Company, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to uphold a Louisiana law allowing corporations to limit their liability was inconsistent with previous rulings of the Court. He contended that this law violated both due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment by creating an arbitrary distinction between individuals and corporations in terms of legal responsibility. Furthermore, he believed it unjustly favored corporate interests over those of individual citizens who might suffer harm as a result of corporate negligence or misconduct. In his view, such laws were not only unconstitutional but also fundamentally unfair because they allowed corporations to evade full accountability for their actions while ordinary citizens could not do so.