In the case of Silver v. Silver in 1929, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning domestic relations and divorce jurisdiction. The plaintiff, Mrs. Silver, filed for divorce in Connecticut while her husband was residing in New York; he had not been personally served with papers but was aware of the proceedings through mail notification. Mr. Silver contested Connecticut's jurisdiction over him as he claimed to be a resident of New York and therefore outside their reach. The Supreme Court held that due process under Fourteenth Amendment does not require personal service within its borders upon non-resident defendants if they are properly notified about legal proceedings against them elsewhere and given an opportunity to appear and defend their interests. This ruling established that states could exercise jurisdiction over non-residents involved in matrimonial disputes if there is adequate notice provided - even when those individuals have never physically entered or resided within said state.

In the dissenting opinion for Silver v. Silver, Justice Stone argued that the Connecticut statute in question did not violate due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. He contended that a state has broad powers to regulate domestic relations and protect public welfare, including preventing family desertion and ensuring support for dependent spouses or children. The law requiring husbands to financially support their wives was seen as an exercise of this power by Justice Stone. He believed it was within a state's right to impose such obligations on husbands without necessarily providing reciprocal responsibilities on wives, given societal conditions at the time which often left women economically disadvantaged in marriages. Therefore, he disagreed with the majority's view that this constituted sex discrimination violating constitutional equal protection principles.