In the 1891 case of Goode v. Gaines, the U.S. Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a Texas law that allowed for property to be seized and sold without notice violated due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiff, Goode, argued that his property had been unlawfully taken by Gaines under this law after he failed to pay taxes on it. The court ruled in favor of Gaines, stating that while due process generally requires notification before seizure or deprivation of property can occur, there are exceptions when it comes to taxation laws because they serve a public purpose and require efficiency in collection for government operations. Therefore, even though Goode did not receive prior notice about his unpaid taxes or impending seizure of his land as would typically be required under due process protections, these actions were deemed constitutional given their context within tax enforcement.

In the dissenting opinion for Goode v. Gaines, Justice Lamar argued that the majority's decision was based on a misinterpretation of both Texas law and federal jurisdictional statutes. He contended that under Texas law, it was clear that Mr. Goode had a valid claim to the property in question because he purchased it from someone who acquired it through adverse possession. Furthermore, Justice Lamar disagreed with the majority's conclusion that federal courts lacked jurisdiction over this case due to its local nature. He pointed out that while some cases involving land disputes are indeed local and thus outside of federal court jurisdiction, others can be heard by federal courts if they involve diverse parties or raise substantial questions about state laws' constitutionality or interpretation - as this case did according to him.