In the 1891 case Dodge v. Tulleys, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land ownership in Kansas. The plaintiff, Dodge, claimed that he had purchased certain lands from an individual who had acquired them through a patent issued by the U.S government under an act of Congress providing for homesteads to actual settlers on public lands. However, before this purchase was made and after the issuance of said patent, these lands were sold at public auction due to unpaid taxes and bought by Tulley's predecessor in title. The court held that while tax sales are generally valid if they comply with statutory requirements; however, such sale cannot be upheld when it is shown that no notice was given as required by law or where there is fraud involved in conducting it. In this case though all formalities were observed during tax sale but since it happened within one year period after issuing patent which according to Homestead Act should have been exempted from taxation hence making tax sale invalid.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Dodge v. Tulleys argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and interpretations of law. The dissenting justices believed that there had been no violation of due process, as the defendants were given ample opportunity to present their case and defend themselves against accusations. They also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of what constituted a "taking" under eminent domain laws, arguing that not every interference or inconvenience should be considered a taking requiring compensation. Furthermore, they contended that if any harm did occur to the defendants' property as a result of public improvements made by plaintiff (Dodge), it was incidental and not direct or intentional - thus falling outside parameters for which compensation would be required under law.