In the Gottlieb v. Thatcher case of 1893, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving property rights and inheritance law. The plaintiff, Gottlieb, was an heir to a deceased individual who had owned land in California. The defendant, Thatcher, claimed ownership of this land based on a will that allegedly transferred it from the deceased to him. However, Gottlieb argued that this will was invalid because it violated certain provisions of California's Civil Code - specifically those related to testamentary dispositions (the transfer or distribution of property after death). After reviewing these arguments and considering relevant legal precedents and principles (including those relating to jurisdiction), the court sided with Gottlieb. It found that under California law at the time when the will was made (1872), such dispositions were indeed prohibited if they did not meet specific requirements - which in this case they did not.

In the dissenting opinion for Gottlieb v. Thatcher, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling in favor of a landlord who evicted tenants due to their failure to pay increased rent contradicts established legal principles. The dissenting justices believed that landlords should not be allowed to unilaterally increase rents without providing additional benefits or improvements in living conditions for tenants. They also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of lease agreements as contracts subject to renegotiation at any time, arguing instead that these are binding documents which provide stability and predictability for both parties involved. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential abuses by landlords if such unilateral actions were permitted under law.