The Fidelity & Columbia Trust Company, acting as executor and trustee of Ewald's estate, brought a case against the City of Louisville in 1917. The dispute centered around whether or not certain bonds owned by Ewald at the time of his death were taxable under Kentucky law. These bonds had been issued by municipalities outside Kentucky and were held physically outside the state. The Supreme Court ruled that these out-of-state municipal bonds could not be taxed by Kentucky because they did not have a physical presence within its jurisdiction. This decision was based on constitutional principles limiting states' power to tax property located beyond their borders.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Fidelity & Columbia Trust Company, Executor and Trustee of Ewald, v. City of Louisville argued that the city's tax assessment on a trust was unconstitutional. The justices contended that the trust property should not be taxed because it was held outside Kentucky state lines and thus beyond its jurisdictional reach. They believed this violated due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment as taxation without representation or fair apportionment based on location could lead to unjust double taxation. Furthermore, they disagreed with majority’s view about trusts being mere legal fictions; instead asserting trusts were real entities deserving constitutional protections against arbitrary government actions like excessive taxation.