In the case of Longest v. Langford et al., 1926, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in North Carolina. The plaintiff, Longest, claimed that he had purchased certain lands from one J.H. Peebles and his wife through a deed dated January 2nd, 1919. However, prior to this transaction on December 31st, 1918; Peebles and his wife had already sold these same lands to defendants Langford et al., which was not recorded until February 3rd ,1919 - after Longest's purchase. The main issue before the court was whether or not North Carolina’s law requiring registration of deeds for them to be valid against subsequent purchasers applied in this instance where both parties were innocent purchasers but one failed to record their deed promptly. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Langford et al., stating that under North Carolina law it is clear that an unrecorded conveyance is void as against subsequent bona fide purchasers who have registered their deeds first even if they bought later than those who didn't register theirs immediately.

In the dissenting opinion for Longest v. Langford et al., the justice disagreed with the majority's decision to dismiss a writ of error on jurisdictional grounds, arguing that it was an evasion of responsibility. The case involved a dispute over land ownership and inheritance rights in North Carolina, which had been decided by state courts based on local laws and customs regarding property succession. The dissenting justice believed that these issues were not merely matters of state law but also raised significant constitutional questions about due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore, he argued, they should have been considered within federal jurisdiction and reviewed by the Supreme Court rather than being dismissed outright without consideration or comment on their merits.