In the case of Gardiner, Trustee of The Perry Real Estate Trust v. William S. Butler & Company, Incorporated et al., 1917, the US Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a contract for land purchase could be enforced when there were discrepancies in property descriptions between different documents related to the transaction. The court ruled that despite minor inconsistencies in description and measurements across various documents (the deed, plan and agreement), they did not materially affect or alter the identity of the property being sold. Therefore, these discrepancies did not invalidate or render unenforceable the contract for sale between parties involved - Gardiner as trustee of Perry Real Estate Trust and William S Butler & Co Inc., along with other defendants named in this suit.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Gardiner, Trustee of the Perry Real Estate Trust v. William S. Butler & Company, Incorporated et al., argued that there was no legal basis for reversing the lower court's decision to dismiss Gardiner's claim against Butler & Co. The dissenting justices contended that Gardiner had failed to provide sufficient evidence proving that he suffered any damages as a result of Butler & Co.'s actions and therefore did not have grounds for seeking compensation from them. They also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Massachusetts law regarding trustees' rights and responsibilities, arguing it was overly broad and could potentially lead to unjust outcomes in future cases involving similar circumstances.