In the case of Longest v. Langford, 1927, the U.S Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a North Carolina law that allowed for the seizure and sale of property to satisfy tax debts violated due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiff, Longest, argued that his property had been unlawfully seized and sold without proper notice or opportunity for hearing. However, after reviewing the circumstances surrounding this case including how notices were served and posted publicly in accordance with state laws at that time; it was ruled by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., on behalf of unanimous court decision (9-0), against Mr. Longest's claim stating there was no violation of due process rights as per Fourteenth Amendment because he received adequate notice about impending action regarding his unpaid taxes before his properties were seized.

In the dissenting opinion for Longest v. Langford, Justice Stone disagreed with the majority's decision to reverse a lower court ruling that had dismissed an indictment against a defendant charged with transporting stolen goods across state lines. He argued that there was sufficient evidence presented at trial to support the charge and conviction, including testimony from witnesses who saw the defendant in possession of stolen property shortly after it was taken. Furthermore, he contended that any discrepancies or inconsistencies in witness testimonies should have been resolved by the jury as part of their fact-finding role rather than being used as grounds for dismissal by an appellate court. In his view, this case represented an overreach of judicial authority into matters properly left to juries and could set a dangerous precedent undermining their function within our legal system.