In the case of Geddes et al. v. Anaconda Copper Mining Company et al., 1920, the United States Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over mining rights in Montana. The plaintiffs, Geddes and others, claimed that they had acquired title to certain mineral lands through adverse possession - essentially arguing that because they had occupied and used the land for an extended period of time without challenge from its legal owners (Anaconda Copper Mining Company), they should be recognized as its rightful owners under law. However, the court ruled against them on two grounds: firstly, it found insufficient evidence to support their claim of adverse possession; secondly, it held that even if such evidence existed, federal laws governing public lands would preclude them from acquiring ownership in this manner since these laws specifically prohibit acquisition by adverse possession.

In the dissenting opinion for Geddes et al. v. Anaconda Copper Mining Company et al., Justice Louis Brandeis argued that the majority's decision to uphold a Montana law requiring corporations to pay taxes on their stock dividends was unconstitutional. He contended that this tax violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause because it unfairly targeted corporations while exempting individuals from paying similar taxes on their income or property gains. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "income" under the Sixteenth Amendment, asserting that stock dividends should not be considered taxable income since they merely represent an increase in capital and do not provide any actual profit or gain until sold by shareholders.