In the case of Lewis Blue Point Oyster Cultivation Company v. Briggs (1912), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Briggs, affirming that he had legal rights to cultivate oysters on a plot of underwater land in New York's Great South Bay. The dispute arose when both parties claimed ownership over this piece of submerged land; Lewis Blue Point Oyster Cultivation Company based its claim on a colonial-era patent granted by King James II, while Briggs' claim was rooted in an 1897 state law which allowed individuals to lease underwater lands for shellfish cultivation. The court held that the original royal grant did not include such submerged lands and therefore could not be used as basis for claiming property rights over them. This ruling upheld states' authority to control and regulate their own waterways and affirmed public trust doctrine - the principle that certain natural resources are preserved for public use, and government is required to maintain these resources for the public's reasonable use.

In the dissenting opinion for Lewis Blue Point Oyster Cultivation Company v. Briggs, it was argued that the majority's decision to allow a private company to cultivate oysters in public waters violated common law principles and infringed upon public rights. The dissenting justices believed that these waters should be kept open for free navigation and fishing by all citizens, not monopolized by one company. They also expressed concern over potential environmental impacts of commercial cultivation on natural oyster beds. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of New York state laws regarding shellfish cultivation, arguing that these laws were intended to protect wild populations rather than promote commercial farming operations. In their view, granting exclusive rights to a single entity contradicted both legal precedent and democratic values.