The Supreme Court case of Ely v. New Mexico and Arizona Railroad Company was a dispute between the railroad company and the plaintiff, Ely, over the ownership of a piece of land. Ely had purchased the land from the railroad company in 1891, but the company later claimed that the land was part of its right-of-way and that Ely had no right to the land. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ely, finding that the railroad company had no right to the land and that Ely was the rightful owner. The Court held that the railroad company had failed to prove that the land was part of its right-of-way and that Ely had acquired the land in good faith and for valuable consideration. The Court also held that the railroad company had failed to prove that it had ever used the land for its own purposes. The Court concluded that Ely was the rightful owner of the land and that the railroad company had no right to it.

In the dissenting opinion of Ely v. New Mexico and Arizona Railroad Company, Justice Field argued that the majority’s decision was an incorrect interpretation of the law. He believed that a railroad company should not be allowed to take private property for its own use without just compensation as required by the Fifth Amendment. The majority had ruled in favor of allowing such taking without providing any form of compensation, which he felt violated both common law principles and constitutional rights. Furthermore, Justice Field noted that it was unfair to allow railroads to benefit from this ruling while other businesses were still subject to laws requiring them to pay fair market value when they took someone else's land for their own purposes. He concluded his dissent by stating that if Congress wanted railroads exempted from these requirements then they should pass legislation explicitly granting them such exemption rather than relying on judicial interpretations alone.