The U.S. Supreme Court case Calhoun Gold Mining Company v. Ajax Gold Mining Company in 1900 revolved around a dispute over mining rights and property boundaries between the two companies in Colorado's Cripple Creek gold district. The Calhoun company claimed that the Ajax company had trespassed on its territory, extracted ore from it, and refused to provide compensation for this extraction. However, the court ruled against Calhoun based on evidence showing that their claim was located outside of their legally defined property lines as per an official government survey conducted by Deputy Mineral Surveyor B.F. Crowell in 1892 which established these boundaries under federal law; hence they did not have legal ownership over the disputed area where Ajax had been operating.

In the dissenting opinion for Calhoun Gold Mining Company v. Ajax Gold Mining Company, the justice argued that there was a lack of sufficient evidence to support the majority's decision. The dissent focused on two main points: first, they disagreed with how the lower court had interpreted and applied mining law; secondly, they believed that certain pieces of key evidence were overlooked or misinterpreted by both courts. They contended that these errors led to an unjust ruling in favor of Ajax Gold Mining Company. Furthermore, it was pointed out that if all available evidence had been properly considered and correctly understood within its legal context, then it would have become clear that Calhoun Gold Mining Company held rightful ownership over disputed mining territory.