In the case of Price et al. v. Magnolia Petroleum Company et al., the Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over oil and gas leases in Oklahoma. The plaintiffs, who were lessors, claimed that they had been defrauded by the lessee (Magnolia Petroleum) because it had not paid them royalties on all petroleum produced from their land as per contract terms. They argued that Magnolia was obligated to pay for both extracted and unextracted petroleum under its lease agreement but failed to do so. The defendants countered this claim by arguing that they only needed to pay for what was actually extracted from beneath the ground surface based on industry standards at that time. The court ruled in favor of Magnolia Petroleum stating there is no obligation upon lessees or operators of an oil well to account for or pay royalty upon any part of such gas which escapes into air after reaching surface without being sold or used off premises.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Price et al. v. Magnolia Petroleum Company et al., argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law allowing for forced pooling of oil and gas resources was an overreach of governmental power, infringing upon property rights protected by the Constitution. The dissent contended that this ruling effectively allowed private companies to seize control over individual landowners' natural resources without their consent or fair compensation, which they believed constituted a violation of due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. They also expressed concern about potential misuse and exploitation resulting from such broad authority being granted to corporations at the expense of individual citizens' rights.