In the case of Kendall, Administrator of RedEagle, et al. v. Ewert in 1921, the Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over inheritance rights under Oklahoma state law and federal restrictions on alienation for Native American land allotments. The decedent was an enrolled member of the Osage Tribe who owned restricted lands and personal property derived from tribal funds; he died intestate (without a will), leaving his wife as his only heir according to state law but not under Osage tribal custom or federal statutes governing such estates. The court held that while generally applicable state laws could be used to determine heirs for these properties if they didn't conflict with federal policy, in this instance Congress had clearly intended to exclude non-Indian spouses from inheriting restricted Indian lands or monies derived therefrom unless specifically provided by will. Therefore, despite being recognized as an heir under Oklahoma's probate code due to their marriage status alone, Mrs. Ewert was ineligible to inherit her late husband's estate because she wasn't named in any testamentary document nor did she meet criteria set forth by relevant congressional acts.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Kendall, Administrator of RedEagle, et al. v. Ewert argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling that invalidated an oil and gas lease on Native American land was incorrect. The dissent contended that the Secretary of Interior had broad discretion under federal law to approve or disapprove leases for mineral resources on tribal lands and his approval should not be second-guessed by courts unless there is clear evidence of fraud or gross mistake resulting in serious loss or damage to the tribe. In this case, they believed no such evidence existed; therefore, it was improper for courts to invalidate a lease approved by him based solely on their own assessment about its fairness and adequacy.