In the case of Titus v. Wallick, 1938, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving federal jurisdiction over state probate matters. The plaintiff, Titus, was an executor of an estate and filed suit against Wallick in federal court to recover assets he believed belonged to the estate. However, Wallick argued that this matter should be handled by state probate courts rather than federal courts. The Supreme Court agreed with Wallick's argument and held that while Federal Courts have general jurisdiction given by Congress under Constitution Article III Section 2 Clause 1; they do not have power or authority to interfere with Probates or control property in possession of State Courts as it is reserved for states under Tenth Amendment unless there is a specific law enacted by Congress allowing them such powers which wasn't present here.

In the dissenting opinion for Titus v. Wallick, Justice Black disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold a tax lien on property that was transferred during bankruptcy proceedings. He argued that this ruling contradicted previous court decisions and federal law which aimed to protect bankrupt individuals from further financial hardship. According to him, allowing such liens would undermine the purpose of bankruptcy laws by preventing debtors from getting a fresh start after their debts have been discharged in bankruptcy proceedings. Furthermore, he contended that it could discourage creditors from participating in these proceedings if they knew their claims might be superseded by tax liens later on. Therefore, he believed that once a debtor has filed for bankruptcy and his assets have been distributed among his creditors under supervision of the court, no additional claims should be allowed against those assets - including tax liens.