In the case of Title Guaranty & Surety Company v. Nichols, 1911, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Oklahoma. The plaintiff, Title Guaranty & Surety Company claimed that it held title to certain lands based on tax deeds issued by local authorities after they had foreclosed for non-payment of taxes by previous owners. However, the defendant, Nichols contested this claim arguing that he was entitled to possession because he purchased and received patents from the federal government under an act providing for allotment of lands in severalty to Indians. The court ruled in favor of Nichols stating that when there is a conflict between state law (in this case Oklahoma's) and federal law regarding Indian lands; federal law prevails as per Article VI Clause 2 (Supremacy Clause) of US Constitution which establishes Federal Law as "the supreme Law of Land". Therefore any subsequent transfer or sale made without compliance with such laws would be invalid even if it were otherwise valid under state laws. This decision reinforced tribal sovereignty rights and established precedent protecting Native American property rights against unlawful seizure due to nonpayment of state taxes.

In the dissenting opinion for Title Guaranty & Surety Company v. Nichols, it was argued that the majority's decision to hold a surety company liable for an attorney's misconduct was unjust and unsupported by precedent or principle. The dissent emphasized that a surety bond is not meant to insure against all possible losses, but only those specifically covered by its terms. In this case, the bond guaranteed faithful performance of duties as an administrator of an estate - not ethical conduct in his separate role as an attorney. Therefore, when he misappropriated funds while acting as legal counsel (a distinct role), it should fall outside the scope of liability under such bonds. Furthermore, they pointed out that holding sureties responsible for such actions would lead to excessive caution and reluctance on their part in issuing bonds even where necessary and appropriate.