In the case of Schuerman v. Arizona in 1901, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving mining rights. The plaintiff, Schuerman, claimed that he had been unlawfully dispossessed of his mining claim by the defendant and sought to regain possession through legal action. However, it was found that Schuerman had failed to perform $100 worth of labor or improvements on his claim for one year as required by law under Section 2324 of the Revised Statutes which governs mining claims. As such, his right to exclusive possession was forfeited and open to relocation by others including defendants who performed requisite work thereby acquiring valid title over said property. Therefore, despite acknowledging irregularities in initial proceedings at lower court level (which were corrected), Supreme Court upheld previous rulings against plaintiff citing non-compliance with statutory requirements necessary for maintaining possessory rights over a mining claim.

The dissenting opinion in the Schuerman v. Arizona case argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings of the Court, particularly those related to due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The dissenting justices believed that Schuerman had been denied his right to a fair trial because he was not allowed to present evidence in his defense regarding his mental state at the time of committing murder, which could have potentially led to a verdict of manslaughter instead. They contended that this denial violated both federal law and principles established by prior Supreme Court decisions on similar issues. Furthermore, they disagreed with how lower courts interpreted and applied Arizona’s laws concerning insanity defenses during trials for violent crimes like murder.