In the 1906 case of Kessler, Wm De C. v. Treat, United States Marshal, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over property rights and jurisdictional issues between federal and state courts. The plaintiff, William de Courcy Kessler had been declared bankrupt by a federal court in New York but claimed that his assets located in Massachusetts were not part of his bankruptcy estate because they were held as collateral for loans made to him by Massachusetts residents. However, these assets had already been seized by the defendant (the US Marshal) under orders from the federal court. The main issue was whether or not those assets could be considered part of Kessler's bankruptcy estate under federal law despite being exempted from seizure under state law due to their status as loan collateral. In its decision, the Supreme Court ruled against Kessler stating that once he was declared bankrupt all his properties became part of his bankruptcy estate regardless where they are situated or how they are held unless specifically exempted by statute. This ruling affirmed that Federal Bankruptcy Law superseded State laws regarding asset protection during insolvency proceedings thereby establishing an important precedent about supremacy clause which states that Federal law takes precedence over conflicting State laws.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Kessler, Wm De C. v. Treat, United States Marshal (1906) was not explicitly recorded or is unknown. Therefore, a summary of this specific viewpoint cannot be provided based on available information about the case's proceedings and judgments.