In the 1914 case Kreitlein v. Ferger, the United States Supreme Court addressed a dispute over land ownership in Indiana. The plaintiff, Kreitlein, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from its original owner and was therefore entitled to possession of it. However, the defendant, Ferger argued that he held rightful title to this same property due to an alleged mistake made by a surveyor during an earlier division of lands which resulted in overlapping claims on this particular parcel. The lower court ruled in favor of Ferger based on evidence presented about historical usage and boundaries recognized by neighboring properties. The Supreme Court reversed this decision upon appeal stating that such evidence could not override or correct official land records unless there were clear indications those records were incorrect or fraudulent - neither condition being met here according to their review. They concluded that while mistakes may have been made during initial surveys leading up to these conflicting claims; once officially recorded titles are established they become definitive absent compelling reasons for revision.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Kreitlein v. Ferger argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling, which found in favor of Ferger, was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that there were significant issues with how the trial had been conducted and felt these errors warranted a retrial. They pointed out several instances where they believed Kreitlein's rights had been violated during his original trial; for example, they noted that he hadn't been given an adequate opportunity to cross-examine witnesses against him. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of certain laws relevant to this case and thought their colleagues' legal reasoning was flawed. As such, while respecting their peers' views on this matter as valid interpretations within our system of justice, they could not concur with them or support upholding a verdict reached under what they saw as questionable circumstances.