In the 1913 case of Seim v. Hurd, the United States Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in North Dakota. The plaintiff, Seim, claimed that he had purchased a parcel of land from an individual who had received it through inheritance from his deceased father. However, the defendant, Hurd argued that this was not valid as there were errors in how the property was transferred after death and thus he held rightful claim to it due to his own purchase agreement with another party involved in the original estate distribution process. The court ruled in favor of Seim stating that despite any irregularities or mistakes made during probate proceedings for estates under state law did not affect federal rights granted by patents issued by Land Department officials under U.S laws governing public lands disposal; therefore making him rightful owner.

In the dissenting opinion for Seim v. Hurd, the justice argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and interpretations of law. The justice believed that a person should not be held liable for damages caused by their livestock if they had taken reasonable precautions to prevent such incidents from occurring. In this case, he felt that Mr. Seim had done everything within his power to keep his cattle contained and therefore should not be held responsible for their escape onto Mr. Hurd's property due to unforeseen circumstances beyond his control (a storm). He also pointed out inconsistencies in how similar cases were handled in different jurisdictions, arguing for a more uniform interpretation of liability laws related to livestock damage across states.