In the case of Chateaugay Ore and Iron Company v. Blake, 1891, the U.S. Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a contract for mining ore could be considered as real estate or personal property in terms of its taxability under New York law. The court ruled that such contracts should be classified as real estate rather than personal property because they involve rights to land and minerals within it which are inseparable from the land itself. This decision meant that these types of contracts were subject to taxation under New York's laws governing real estate taxes instead of those pertaining to personal property taxes.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Chateaugay Ore and Iron Company v. Blake, it was argued that the plaintiff's claim should not have been dismissed on demurrer. The dissenting justices believed that there were sufficient grounds to believe a contract existed between parties which had been breached by non-payment of royalties due under said contract. They contended that if such a breach occurred, then damages could be claimed even without explicit stipulation in the original agreement. Furthermore, they disagreed with majority’s interpretation of New York law regarding mining leases and royalty payments; instead arguing these laws did not prevent enforcement of contracts like this one where payment is made based on quantity extracted rather than land area leased or time spent extracting ore.