In the case of Mackall v. Willoughby in 1896, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land ownership and inheritance laws. The plaintiff, Mackall, claimed that he was entitled to certain property under his father's will which had been sold by the defendant, Willoughby. However, it was discovered that there were errors in recording the deeds for this property over several years prior to its sale by Willoughby. The court held that despite these errors and omissions in record-keeping procedures regarding real estate transactions at different points in time; they did not invalidate subsequent sales or transfers of said properties if done without fraudulent intent or gross negligence on part of sellers/transferees involved therein. Therefore, even though some procedural mistakes occurred during past conveyances related to disputed lands; their current owner (Willoughby) acquired them legally through bona fide purchase for value without notice about such defects thereby protecting his title against any adverse claims based upon earlier unrecorded interests including those asserted by Mackall under his father's testamentary dispositions.

In the dissenting opinion for Mackall v. Willoughby, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling was incorrect because it failed to consider important aspects of property law. He contended that when a person purchases land with full knowledge of an existing lease on said land, they are bound by the terms and conditions of that lease until its expiration date. The new owner cannot arbitrarily alter or terminate this agreement without due process or just cause as per established legal principles governing landlord-tenant relationships. In his view, Mr. Mackall should have been allowed to continue operating his business on leased premises despite changes in ownership since he had not violated any provisions outlined in his original contract with previous owners.