In the Northern Pacific Railroad Company v. Egeland case of 1895, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Northern Pacific Railroad Company. The dispute arose over land grants given to railroad companies by Congress to encourage railway construction across America's western frontier. Specifically, it involved a parcel of land that both parties claimed ownership over - one through purchase from the railroad company and another via homesteading laws. The court decided that even though there were ambiguities in how these lands should be distributed between public and private entities, Congressional intent was clear: railroads had priority for these lands until they chose which ones they wanted or didn't want within a certain timeframe after completing each section of track. If they failed to make their selections within this period, then settlers could claim them under homestead laws.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Northern Pacific Railroad Company v. Egeland argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and interpretations of related laws. The dissenter believed that the railroad company should not be allowed to claim land under a federal grant if it had already been occupied by settlers before being surveyed for railway use. They contended that this interpretation would better align with Congress' intent when passing legislation regarding land grants, which was to encourage settlement and development in these areas rather than allowing large corporations to monopolize them. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's assertion that there were no legal obstacles preventing Northern Pacific from claiming this land, arguing instead that existing homestead rights should take precedence over later claims made by corporations like railroads.