In the 1913 case of Gauthier v. Morrison, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land ownership in Louisiana. The plaintiff, Gauthier, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from one Mr. Broussard who allegedly owned it due to inheritance from his mother's estate (Mrs. Broussard). However, Mrs.Broussard's will was contested by her daughter and son-in-law (the Morrisons), arguing that they were rightful owners as per an earlier deed transfer made before Mrs.Broussard's death. The court found that although there was evidence supporting both claims of ownership - namely the disputed will and the prior deed transfer - neither party could conclusively prove their claim beyond reasonable doubt due to conflicting state laws regarding succession rights and property transfers upon death. Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld lower courts' decisions favoring Morrison based on principles of equity rather than strict legal interpretation; reasoning that since both parties had equally valid but unprovable claims under law, preference should be given to those already in possession or use of said property i.e., "possession is nine-tenths of law". This ruling set precedent for future cases dealing with similar disputes over ambiguous or conflicting land titles.

In the dissenting opinion for Gauthier v. Morrison, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling denying damages to Gauthier was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that there were significant errors in the trial process which had unfairly prejudiced the jury against Gauthier. They pointed out inconsistencies and contradictions in witness testimonies, as well as potential bias from witnesses who were friends of Morrison. Furthermore, they disagreed with how evidence was handled during the trial; specifically, they felt that certain pieces of evidence should have been admitted but weren't due to procedural issues rather than their relevance or credibility. These justices also took issue with instructions given by the judge to jurors regarding how much weight they should give different types of evidence and testimony - instructions which these justices felt skewed towards favoring Morrison's case over Gauthier's.