In the 1904 case of Hodge v. Muscatine County, Iowa, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Muscatine County. The case revolved around a dispute over taxes on land owned by Hodge that was located within the county's boundaries. Hodge claimed that he had already paid his taxes to another entity and therefore owed nothing to Muscatine County. However, the court found no evidence supporting this claim and upheld an earlier decision from a lower court which stated that if there were any irregularities or errors in tax assessment or collection procedures, they did not invalidate the entire process nor exempted him from paying his due taxes. Therefore, it was concluded that Mr.Hodge still owed property taxes to Muscatine County.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Hodge v. Muscatine County, Iowa disagreed with the majority's ruling that a county could be held liable for damages caused by its failure to maintain a bridge. The dissent argued that counties are subdivisions of the state and therefore share in its sovereign immunity from lawsuits unless specifically waived by statute. They contended that holding a county financially responsible for such failures would place an undue burden on taxpayers who fund these entities, potentially leading to financial instability or bankruptcy. Furthermore, they believed it was not within their jurisdiction as federal judges to interpret state law regarding liability issues; this should be left up to state courts instead.