In the 1891 case of Missouri ex rel. The Quincy, Missouri and Pacific Railroad Company v. Harris, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute between a railroad company and an individual over land rights. The Quincy, Missouri & Pacific Railroad Company claimed that it had been granted certain lands by Congress under an act passed in 1866 for construction of its railway line. However, these lands were already occupied by Mr. Harris who held patents issued to him by the United States government for his homestead claim filed before the passage of said Act in 1866. The court decided in favor of Mr.Harris stating that he was entitled to retain possession as he had made improvements on this land prior to any notice from either party about their conflicting claims or interests regarding this property.The decision emphasized that when there is conflict between private settlement rights and subsequent grants given out by Congress,the former shall prevail unless explicitly revoked or modified.This ruling underscored respect for private property rights even against large corporations like railroads which played significant roles during America's westward expansion era.

In the dissenting opinion for Missouri ex rel. The Quincy, Missouri and Pacific Railroad Company v. Harris, Justice Lamar argued that the court majority had overstepped its jurisdiction by intervening in a matter of state law. He contended that it was not within the purview of federal courts to decide whether or not a state statute is constitutional under the laws of said state; rather, this responsibility lies with the states themselves. Furthermore, he disagreed with his colleagues' interpretation of due process rights as they pertain to corporations and their property interests. In his view, these entities do not have an inherent right to profit from their properties without any regulation or interference from government authorities - especially when such regulations are enacted in public interest.