In the case of Daniels v. Wagner in 1914, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership. The plaintiff, Daniels, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from an individual who had obtained it through inheritance. However, this was contested by Wagner and others who argued that they were the rightful owners due to their own familial ties and inheritance rights. The court ruled in favor of Wagner on grounds that there was insufficient evidence provided by Daniels to prove his claim to ownership; specifically noting inconsistencies within his testimony regarding how he acquired the property as well as lack of documentation supporting his purchase claim.

The dissenting opinion in the Daniels v. Wagner case argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law prohibiting non-residents from fishing in its waters was inconsistent with previous rulings and violated the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. The dissent contended that this clause guarantees citizens of each state equal access to all privileges and immunities offered by any other state, including natural resources such as fish. They believed that while states have authority over their own natural resources, they cannot discriminate against out-of-state residents when it comes to accessing these resources for personal use or livelihoods without violating constitutional rights.