In the 1893 Supreme Court case Kinkead v. United States, the court ruled on a dispute over land ownership in Kansas City. The plaintiff, Kinkead, claimed that he had purchased lots from an individual who had received them as part of a treaty with the Wyandot Tribe. However, when it was discovered that these lands were actually part of public domain and not tribal lands to be sold under treaty provisions, they were seized by U.S government officials for public use. The Supreme Court held that since the original sale was invalid due to misrepresentation of land status (tribal vs public), any subsequent sales including those made to Kinkead were also voided. Therefore, Kinkead's claim lacked legal standing and his suit against the United States for recovery of said property failed.

In the dissenting opinion for the case Kinkead v. United States, it was argued that there were significant issues with how evidence was handled during trial. The dissenting justices believed that certain pieces of evidence should not have been admitted due to their questionable validity and relevance to the case at hand. They also took issue with instructions given by the judge to the jury regarding this evidence, arguing they were misleading and could potentially bias jurors against Kinkead. Furthermore, they disagreed with majority's interpretation of law concerning conspiracy charges; in their view, a person cannot be convicted on such charges unless an overt act is committed in furtherance of said conspiracy - something which they felt had not been sufficiently proven in this instance. Thus, these justices concluded that Kinkead did not receive a fair trial and his conviction should therefore be overturned.