In the 1895 case Bryan v. Brasius, the United States Supreme Court addressed a dispute over land ownership in Kansas City, Missouri. The plaintiff, Bryan, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from one Mr. McGee and later discovered that it was already mortgaged to another party - defendant Brasius - who subsequently foreclosed on said mortgage and took possession of the property. Bryan argued that at the time of his purchase from McGee, there were no public records indicating any existing mortgages on this particular parcel of land; therefore he should be considered an innocent purchaser for value without notice and thus entitled to keep the property free from prior liens or encumbrances. The court ruled against Bryan stating that although there may have been some irregularities with how previous transactions involving this plot were recorded publicly (which could potentially mislead subsequent buyers), these did not absolve him completely as he failed to exercise due diligence before purchasing such real estate by thoroughly investigating its title history beyond just relying solely upon public records which are known sometimes contain errors or omissions.

The dissenting opinion in Bryan v. Brasius argued that the majority's decision was incorrect because it failed to properly consider the rights of property owners. The dissenting justices believed that, under Pennsylvania law, a landowner has an absolute right to use and enjoy his or her property without interference from others. They contended that this includes the right to prevent others from using one's property for their own benefit without permission or compensation. In this case, they felt that Brasius had violated Bryan's rights by constructing a railroad across his land without obtaining proper consent or providing adequate compensation. Therefore, they would have reversed the lower court’s judgment and ruled in favor of Bryan instead.