In the 1908 case of Knop v. Monongahela River Consolidated Coal and Coke Company, the United States Supreme Court addressed a dispute over coal mining rights in Pennsylvania. The plaintiff, Knop, claimed that he had been deprived of his rightful share of profits from a coal mine operated by the defendant company on land that both parties claimed to own. The lower courts ruled in favor of the defendant based on evidence showing they held legal title to the property through a series of transactions dating back several decades. However, upon review, it was found that one such transaction involved an illegal sale by someone who did not have proper authority to sell at that time due to bankruptcy proceedings. Therefore, all subsequent transfers were invalid as well making Knop's claim valid since he purchased directly from those with legitimate ownership rights following resolution of said bankruptcy proceedings.

The dissenting opinion in the case of KNOP v. MONONGAHELA RIVER CONSOLIDATED COAL AND COKE COMPANY argued that the majority's decision was incorrect because it failed to take into account the specific circumstances and conditions under which workers were employed by coal companies at that time. The dissenting justices believed that these conditions, including long hours, dangerous work environments, and low pay, made it difficult for workers to refuse employment even when they knew there were risks involved. They also pointed out that many of these workers had no other options for employment due to their lack of education or skills. Therefore, they felt it was unfair to hold them responsible for injuries sustained while working under such conditions without providing any form of compensation or protection from their employers.