The U.S. Supreme Court case Silver King Coalition Mines Company v. Conkling Mining Company in 1920 revolved around a dispute over mining claims and property rights between the two companies involved. The Silver King Coalition Mines Co., which had acquired several patented lode mining claims, alleged that the Conkling Mining Co.'s operations were infringing on their subsurface rights by extracting ore from veins apexing within its territory but dipping into theirs. The court ruled in favor of the Silver King Coalition Mines Co., upholding the principle of extralateral right under U.S law, which allows owners to follow a vein or lode of mineral ore that extends beyond their vertical plane boundary as long as it originates within their claim's surface boundaries (apex). This decision reinforced existing laws regarding mineral extraction and property rights for mining companies.

In the dissenting opinion for Silver King Coalition Mines Company v. Conkling Mining Company, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling in favor of Conkling Mining Company was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that there were significant errors made by the trial court which should have led to a reversal of its judgment. They contended that Silver King had established ownership rights over certain mining properties through adverse possession and these rights were not adequately considered by either the trial or appellate courts. Furthermore, they disagreed with how evidence presented during litigation was interpreted and applied under existing law, arguing this resulted in an unjust outcome for Silver King. Thus, while acknowledging their colleagues' differing views on complex legal issues raised during proceedings, they firmly maintained their stance against affirmance of prior rulings unfavorable to Silver King.