The U.S. Supreme Court case Fishburn v. Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway Company in 1890 revolved around a dispute over land ownership rights between the railway company and Mr. Fishburn, who claimed that he had purchased the disputed property from its original owner before it was acquired by the railroad through eminent domain for construction purposes. The lower court ruled in favor of Mr.Fishburn but on appeal to the Supreme Court, this decision was reversed based on an interpretation of federal law which stated that railroads were entitled to acquire private lands for public use under certain conditions without interference from state laws or individual contracts made prior to such acquisitions.The ruling emphasized that when a corporation is authorized by Congress to construct a national highway for public use, neither states nor individuals can prevent it from acquiring necessary lands via condemnation proceedings if they are unable or unwilling to sell voluntarily.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Fishburn v. Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway Company argued that the majority's decision was incorrect because it failed to properly consider the rights of property owners affected by railway construction. The dissenters believed that while railroads are indeed necessary for public convenience, their construction should not infringe upon private property rights without just compensation as guaranteed by law. They contended that a railroad company cannot simply take possession of an individual’s land under eminent domain laws without first paying fair market value for it or providing adequate compensation as determined through due process of law. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "public use," arguing instead that this term should be strictly construed to prevent potential abuses by corporations at the expense of individual citizens' rights.