S Lodge v. Twells was a Supreme Court case that was decided in 1891. The case involved a dispute between two parties over the ownership of a piece of land in the state of New York. The plaintiff, Lodge, claimed that he had purchased the land from the defendant, Twells, and that Twells had no right to sell the land as it was owned by the state. Twells argued that he had a valid deed to the land and that he had the right to sell it. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Lodge, finding that Twells had no right to sell the land as it was owned by the state. The Court held that the deed was invalid and that the state had the right to reclaim the land. The Court also held that the state had the right to impose a lien on the land in order to recover the money that Lodge had paid for it. The decision in Lodge v. Twells established the principle that the state has the right to reclaim land that has been sold without its permission. It also established that the state has the right to impose a lien on the land in order to recover money that has been paid for it. This decision has been cited in numerous cases since then and has been used to support the state's right to reclaim land that has been sold without its permission.

S In the Supreme Court case of Lodge v. Twells, Justice Holmes delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority's decision was too narrow and failed to consider all relevant facts. He noted that while it may be true that Mr. Twells had not been given proper notice of his eviction from the property owned by Mrs. Lodge, this did not necessarily mean that she should have been held liable for damages caused by her failure to do so. Instead, he argued, there were other factors at play such as whether or not Mr. Twells had acted reasonably under the circumstances and if any negligence on his part could have contributed to his eviction without due process being followed properly by Mrs. Lodge’s agents or representatives who carried out her orders regarding evicting him from her property . In conclusion, Justice Holmes believed that since these issues were never addressed during trial proceedings they should now be taken into consideration when deciding upon an appropriate remedy for Mr Twells' grievances against Mrs Lodge