This Supreme Court case involved Robinson Lytle, Lydia Louisa Lytle, Elias Hooper and Mary E. Hooper, as well as Nathan H. Cloyes (under the guardianship of Wiley Clayton). They were suing The State of Arkansas, William Russell and several trustees from the Real Estate Bank of Arkansas for a variety of reasons including fraud in relation to land titles. The plaintiffs argued that they had been wrongfully deprived of their property rights due to fraudulent activities by those named in the suit. Ultimately it was decided that while some defendants may have acted with negligence or carelessness when dealing with land titles, there was not enough evidence to prove any intentional wrongdoing on their part so no damages were awarded to the plaintiffs.

In Robinson Lytle and Lydia Louisa Lytle, His Wife, Elias Hooper and Mary E. Hooper, His Wife, And Nathan H. Cloyes v. The State of Arkansas et al., the dissenting opinion argued that the majority had failed to consider a key point in their decision: whether or not the plaintiffs had been given due process when they were denied access to certain lands by an act of legislature passed in 1844-45. The dissenters believed that since this was a matter involving property rights which could only be taken away through proper legal proceedings such as condemnation or eminent domain proceedings, it should have been considered before any ruling was made on the case at hand. Furthermore, they argued that even if there had been no violation of due process in this particular instance (which is what the majority concluded), then it would still be necessary for future cases involving similar issues to ensure that all parties are afforded appropriate legal protections so as not to violate anyone's constitutional right to due process under law.