In the 1902 case of Boston and Montana Consolidated Copper and Silver Mining Company v. Montana Ore Purchasing Company, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Boston and Montana Consolidated Copper and Silver Mining Company (B&M). The dispute arose over mining rights to a vein of copper ore that extended from B&M's property into land owned by the Montana Ore Purchasing Company (MOPC). MOPC had been extracting ore from this vein on their property, which B&M argued was part of its lode under an earlier patent claim. The court held that according to federal law at the time when both companies made their initial claims, if a lode extends from one claim onto another's land, it belongs entirely to the first company who discovered it within their own boundaries - in this case B&M. Therefore, any extraction done by MOPC constituted trespassing and they were liable for damages.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Boston and Montana Consolidated Copper and Silver Mining Company v. Montana Ore Purchasing Company argued that the majority's decision was based on an incorrect interpretation of mining law, particularly regarding extralateral rights. The dissent contended that a miner who owns both surface and underground rights to a vein should be allowed to follow it outside their vertical boundaries if it dips into another's property. They believed this principle had been established by previous court decisions as well as Congress' intent when drafting mining laws. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority’s view that such extralateral rights could lead to unnecessary disputes between miners; instead, they felt these were rare occurrences which did not justify altering long-established principles of mining law.