In the Lewisburg Bank v. Sheffey case of 1890, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a national bank could be sued in a federal court by residents of another state where it had established branches. The plaintiff, Sheffey, was from Virginia and filed suit against Lewisburg Bank (a West Virginia-based institution) in a federal circuit court located in his home state. The defendant argued that as per Section 5198 of the Revised Statutes, they were only liable to being sued within their home state or district where they were established. However, Justice Samuel Blatchford ruled on behalf of an unanimous court that this provision did not apply to suits brought by citizens residing outside the bank's home jurisdiction if there is diversity between parties' citizenships and amount involved exceeds $500 - thus allowing for such cases to fall under federal jurisdiction according to Article III Section 2 Clause 1 of Constitution which grants Federal courts power over controversies between citizens from different states.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of Lewisburg Bank v. Sheffey, it was argued that there were significant issues with how the majority interpreted and applied certain laws related to bankruptcy and property rights. The dissenting justices believed that a more careful reading of these laws would have led to a different outcome in this case. They also disagreed with how the majority handled evidence related to Sheffey's financial situation at various points in time, arguing that some pieces of evidence were given too much weight while others were unjustly dismissed or overlooked. Furthermore, they felt that certain legal principles regarding debt repayment and creditor protection should have been prioritized over other considerations during deliberations on this case.