In the Ludeling v. Chaffe case of 1891, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with resolving a dispute over land ownership in Louisiana. The plaintiff, Ludeling, claimed that he had purchased a tract of land from its original owner and thus held rightful title to it. However, the defendant, Chaffe argued that he had acquired this same piece of property through tax sales conducted by local authorities due to unpaid taxes by previous owners. The court ruled in favor of Chaffe stating that his claim was valid as long as these tax sales were carried out according to state law and if they complied with due process requirements under the Fourteenth Amendment - even if there were irregularities or errors during such proceedings which did not affect their fundamental fairness or integrity.

In the dissenting opinion for Ludeling v. Chaffe, Justice Lamar argued that the majority's decision was incorrect because it failed to consider Louisiana state law regarding mortgages and property rights. He contended that under Louisiana law, a mortgage is not considered an absolute conveyance of title but merely a lien or security for debt. Therefore, he believed that when Mr. Ludeling paid off his mortgage debt to Mrs. Chaffe, he should have regained full ownership of his property without any further obligation to her heirs or assigns (those who would inherit or receive her property). Justice Lamar also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of federal bankruptcy laws in this case; he felt they were applying them too broadly and infracting upon states' rights to regulate their own internal affairs concerning real estate transactions and contracts.