In the case of Taylor v. Leesnitzer (1910), the United States Supreme Court addressed a dispute over land ownership in Oklahoma. The plaintiff, Taylor, claimed that he had purchased a piece of property from an individual who was part Indian and therefore exempt from certain taxes under federal law. However, due to unpaid taxes by previous owners who were not tax-exempt, the county sold this land at auction where it was bought by Leesnitzer. When Taylor sought to assert his ownership rights over the property against Leesnitzer's claim based on purchase at tax sale, lower courts ruled in favor of Leesnitzer. The Supreme Court reversed these decisions stating that because federal law protected Native Americans from such taxation during this period and since title never legally passed out of their hands due to non-payment of those invalid taxes; thus any subsequent sales or auctions were also invalid. Therefore, when Taylor purchased the property directly from its original owner - a person with native heritage - he became its rightful owner despite any claims made by others based on purchases at later invalidated tax sales.

In the dissenting opinion for Taylor v. Leesnitzer, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling against Mr. Taylor was incorrect because it failed to consider important aspects of contract law and property rights. The dissenting justices believed that Mr. Taylor had a valid claim on his late wife's estate based on an agreement they made before her death, despite not being explicitly named in her will or any other legal documents related to her estate. They contended that this agreement constituted a binding contract between them and should have been honored by the courts regardless of its informal nature or lack of written evidence supporting its existence.