In the 1915 case of Cubbins v. Mississippi River Commission, the United States Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership and compensation related to flood control efforts along the Mississippi River. The plaintiff, Cubbins, owned an island in the river that was taken by the defendant, Mississippi River Commission (MRC), for use as a spillway to prevent flooding. Cubbins argued that he should be compensated for his lost property under eminent domain laws which require fair payment when private property is seized for public use. However, MRC claimed they did not have to pay because their actions were justified under riparian rights - legal principles governing access and use of waterways - asserting that controlling floods benefited all landowners along the river including Cubbins himself before his island was taken away from him. The court ruled in favor of MRC stating it had acted within its authority given by Congress and no compensation was due since such works are considered improvements benefiting all riparian owners.

The dissenting opinion in the Cubbins v. Mississippi River Commission case argued that the plaintiff, Cubbins, should have been compensated for his land which was taken over by the Mississippi River Commission. The justice disagreed with the majority's view that no compensation was due because it was a result of an improvement project aimed at benefiting public navigation and flood control. He believed this constituted a taking under eminent domain laws and therefore required just compensation to be paid to Cubbins as per Fifth Amendment rights. Furthermore, he contended that any benefits accruing from such projects were incidental and could not offset or justify uncompensated takings of private property for public use.