The U.S. Supreme Court case Plaquemines Tropical Fruit Company v. Henderson in 1897 revolved around a dispute over the ownership of certain lands located in Louisiana, which were claimed by both parties involved - The Plaquemines Tropical Fruit Company and Mr. Henderson. The main issue was whether these lands had been rightfully acquired by the fruit company from the State of Louisiana or if they still belonged to the federal government, thus making Mr.Henderson's claim valid as he held a title from them for those same lands. After examining all evidence presented including various acts and statutes related to land grants, it was determined that there had been no intention on part of Congress to grant such large tracts of swamp and overflowed lands to states like Louisiana without any conditions attached; hence they could not have passed into private hands without fulfilling those conditions first (which included reclamation). Therefore, it was ruled that these disputed lands never became property of state but remained vested in United States until patented out under Swamp Land Act provisions; consequently dismissing claims made by fruit company while upholding rights granted through patents issued directly by federal government.

In the dissenting opinion for Plaquemines Tropical Fruit Company v. Henderson, the justice disagreed with the majority's interpretation of a Louisiana statute that allowed sheriffs to sell perishable goods immediately upon seizure without providing notice or an opportunity for hearing. The dissent argued that this interpretation violated due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S Constitution. They believed that even if property is perishable, its owner should still be given some form of notice and opportunity to contest before it is sold off by authorities. This would ensure fairness in proceedings and uphold constitutional protections against deprivation of property without due process.