In the United States v. Corbett case of 1909, the Supreme Court ruled on a matter concerning land ownership and mining rights. The defendant, Corbett, had claimed ownership of a piece of land in California under the Mining Act of 1872 but was challenged by the U.S government who argued that he did not fulfill all requirements stipulated by law to gain full possession. Specifically, they contended that he failed to perform $500 worth of labor or improvements on each claim annually as required by Section 2324 Revised Statutes (RS). However, it was found that RS §2324 only applied if there were adverse claimants involved which wasn't applicable in this case since no third party contested his claims within the given period after patent proceedings began. Therefore, even though Corbett didn’t comply with annual work/improvement requirement after initiating patent proceedings for his claims - due to absence of any adverse claimant during said period - his right over those lands remained unaffected according to law at time when patents issued; thus validating his ownership.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Corbett, 1909, Justice Harlan disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling that denied an appeal by a man convicted of murder on an Indian reservation. The defendant had argued his trial was unfair because it took place in federal court rather than state court and he was not allowed to challenge potential jurors based on their race or ethnicity. Justice Harlan believed these were valid concerns and felt the defendant should have been granted a new trial. He also expressed concern about how this case could set precedent for future cases involving Native American rights and jurisdiction issues between federal and state courts.