In the case of Olympia Mining & Milling Company, Limited v. Kerns in 1914, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over mining claims in Washington state. The Olympia Mining & Milling Company had sued William Kerns and others for allegedly trespassing on its property and extracting valuable minerals without permission. However, the defendants argued that they were entitled to mine there because they had located their claim before Olympia did. The lower courts sided with Kerns, finding that he had indeed staked his claim first and therefore held valid title to it under federal law. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision upon appeal by Olympia Mining & Milling Co., stating that while both parties made mistakes during their respective location processes (which are required by law), only those errors which would mislead or deceive other miners can invalidate a claim - not mere technicalities as alleged by the plaintiff company against Mr.Kerns' party's process of locating their mining claims.

In the dissenting opinion for Olympia Mining & Milling Company, Limited v. Kerns, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling in favor of Kerns contradicted established principles of property law and equity. The dissent contended that Olympia Mining had made significant investments into improving and maintaining the disputed mining claim based on their good faith belief that they were its rightful owners. They further noted that Kerns had not actively asserted his ownership rights or contributed to these improvements until after Olympia Mining had already invested substantial resources into the property. Therefore, according to this view, fairness dictated that either Olympia should be recognized as the lawful owner due to their investment and maintenance efforts or at least be compensated by Kerns for increasing the value of his property if he is indeed deemed its rightful owner.