In the case of Gila Bend Reservoir and Irrigation Company v. Gila Water Company in 1906, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over water rights between two companies in Arizona. The plaintiff, Gila Bend Reservoir and Irrigation Company, claimed that it had prior appropriation rights to use water from the Gila River for irrigation purposes based on an 1864 territorial law. The defendant, Gila Water Company argued that they also had rights to use this water under a later federal reclamation act which allowed them to construct dams and reservoirs along the river. The court held that while both parties were entitled to appropriate waters of non-navigable streams for beneficial uses such as irrigation or mining within their respective territories; priority was given according to who first put it into beneficial use - known as "first in time is first in right". Therefore, since there was no evidence showing any diversion or actual application of waters by either party before each other's appropriations took effect; neither company could claim superior right over another based solely upon priority dates mentioned in their respective charters. This decision established important precedents regarding western water laws including recognition of appropriative rights doctrine (prior appropriation) and its coexistence with riparianism (waterfront land ownership).

In the dissenting opinion for Gila Bend Reservoir and Irrigation Company v. Gila Water Company, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling in favor of Gila Water Company was incorrect. The dissent contended that there were significant errors made by the trial court which should have been rectified on appeal. Specifically, they believed that evidence regarding water rights had not been properly considered or evaluated during trial proceedings. They also disagreed with how damages were calculated and awarded to Gila Water Company, arguing these amounts did not accurately reflect actual losses suffered due to alleged infringements on their water rights by Gila Bend Reservoir and Irrigation Company. Furthermore, they took issue with certain legal principles applied in this case concerning property law and contracts related to natural resources like water supply systems.