In the 1896 case of Cake v. Mohun, the United States Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over mining claims in Colorado. The plaintiff, Cake, argued that he had rightful ownership to certain parts of a mine based on his prior discovery and occupation under the U.S Mining Laws of 1872. However, Mohun disputed this claim by arguing that he had legal title to these sections through patents granted by the government after an official survey was conducted. The court ruled in favor of Mohun stating that while miners have rights to their claims upon discovery and occupation as per law; however when it comes to disputes about boundaries or extent of such claims, official surveys are considered authoritative for defining limits and granting titles. Therefore any discrepancies between miner's understanding or markings and those defined by formal surveys would be resolved in favor of latter unless there is clear evidence proving fraud or mistake during surveying process.

The dissenting opinion in the case of CAKE v. MOHUN argued that the majority's decision was incorrect because it failed to properly consider and apply established principles of equity jurisprudence. The dissent contended that Mohun, who had purchased a piece of land from Cake, should not be held responsible for paying off a mortgage on the property which he was unaware existed at the time of purchase. It asserted that Cake, as the original owner and mortgager of the property, should bear responsibility for settling any outstanding debts associated with it. The dissent further criticized how evidence presented during trial proceedings was interpreted by other justices; arguing they overlooked key facts which supported this view. Ultimately, it concluded that upholding such an unjust ruling would set a dangerous precedent for future cases involving similar circumstances.