In the case of Kinney v. Columbia Savings & Loan Association, 1903, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Kansas City. The plaintiff, Kinney, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from an individual who was later declared bankrupt. However, before bankruptcy proceedings began and unbeknownst to Kinney at the time of purchase, this individual had already mortgaged his property to Columbia Savings & Loan Association as security for loans received. When Columbia sought to foreclose on its mortgage after learning about the sale to Kinney post-bankruptcy declaration by their debtor (the original owner), it led to litigation between them and Kinney. The court ruled in favor of Columbia Savings & Loan Association stating that they held priority rights over the property because their mortgage predated both -Kinney's purchase and subsequent bankruptcy filing by their debtor- thus making them first lienholder entitled for foreclosure action against said property despite any change in ownership thereafter.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Kinney v. Columbia Savings & Loan Association argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established legal principles regarding property rights and obligations. The dissent contended that, under existing law, when a person purchases property with knowledge of an existing lease, they are bound by its terms unless there is explicit agreement to terminate it. In this case, Columbia Savings & Loan Association bought land knowing it was leased to Kinney for five years. Despite this knowledge, they sought to evict him before his lease expired without any agreed termination clause between both parties. The dissent believed that allowing such action would undermine security in real estate transactions and violate longstanding rules about respecting contractual agreements made prior to purchase or transfer of ownership.