The Kneeland v. Lawrence case in 1890 revolved around a dispute over land ownership and the validity of a will. The plaintiff, Kneeland, claimed that he was entitled to certain lands under the will of his deceased relative. However, the defendant, Lawrence (executor of the estate), argued that these lands were not part of the decedent's property at his death because they had been sold prior to it. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Lawrence stating that any sale made by an individual during their lifetime is valid even if it contradicts provisions made in their will for after their death. Therefore, since these lands had already been sold before death occurred they could not be considered as part of inheritance or passed on through a will.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Kneeland v. Lawrence argued that the majority's decision was a misinterpretation of the law and an overreach of judicial authority. The dissenters believed that it was not within their purview to decide on matters related to property ownership, which they considered should be left to state courts or legislatures. They also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of what constituted "public use," arguing that this term should only apply when there is a clear benefit for all members of society, rather than just one individual or group. Furthermore, they contended that by allowing private entities such as railroads to seize land under eminent domain laws without providing adequate compensation violated individuals' constitutional rights.