In the case of Hoffman et al. v. McClelland, Jr., et al., in 1923, the Supreme Court addressed a dispute over land ownership and mineral rights in Louisiana between two parties: one party had purchased the property from a tax sale while another claimed to have acquired it through inheritance. The main issue was whether or not due process was violated when Louisiana law allowed for property sold at tax sales to be redeemed within three years but did not require notification of such sales to those with potential claims on that property (such as heirs). The court ruled against Hoffman and others who bought land at a tax sale, stating that their failure to notify McClelland about the sale constituted an infringement upon his constitutional right of due process under Fourteenth Amendment. Thus, despite having legally purchased the land according to state law, they were stripped of their claim because they failed to provide adequate notice.

In the dissenting opinion for Hoffman et al. v. McClelland, Jr., et al., Justice Holmes argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling was incorrect because it failed to consider important aspects of property law and taxation principles. He contended that the state had no right to tax land owned by non-residents at higher rates than those imposed on residents, as this violated equal protection rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of what constituted "property," arguing that they were too narrow in their definition and did not take into account broader conceptions of ownership and possession rights. In his view, these oversights led to an unjust outcome where out-of-state landowners were unfairly burdened with excessive taxes compared to in-state owners.