The U.S. Supreme Court case Miller et al. v. Schoene, in 1927, revolved around the conflict between private property rights and public welfare needs. The Millers were cedar tree owners in Virginia who sued C.Prescott Schoene, the state entomologist of Virginia for ordering them to cut down their trees to prevent a disease from spreading to nearby apple orchards which was essential for the state's economy. The court ruled in favor of Schoene stating that when it comes to choosing between two types of property damage - one certain (cedar rust on apple crops) and another theoretical (possible future value loss by cutting cedars), it is not necessary for the government to compensate for preventing an uncertain harm at expense of a certain one. This ruling established that states have broad discretion under their police powers when acting upon public interest even if such actions may result in harm or loss to some individuals without compensation.

In the dissenting opinion for Miller et al. v. Schoene, Justice Stone argued that the state's decision to destroy cedar trees on private property to prevent a disease from spreading to apple orchards was an unconstitutional taking without just compensation. He contended that this action violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it unfairly burdened individual cedar tree owners for public benefit without providing them any form of compensation. The majority held that protecting apple orchards was in greater public interest than preserving cedar trees, but Justice Stone disagreed with this reasoning and believed it did not justify uncompensated destruction of private property by government authorities.