In the United States v. Mayer case of 1914, the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving judicial immunity. The case arose when a federal judge, Julius M. Mayer, was sued by an individual who claimed that his constitutional rights were violated due to wrongful imprisonment ordered by Judge Mayer in contempt proceedings. The plaintiff argued that he had been denied due process and equal protection under the law as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court held that judges are immune from liability for damages for acts committed within their judicial jurisdiction even if those actions were done maliciously or corruptly; this is known as absolute judicial immunity. This principle ensures independence of action and finality of judgment in courts while protecting judges from undue influence through potential personal liability. Therefore, Judge Mayer's decision to imprison the plaintiff could not be challenged via a lawsuit seeking damages because it fell within his official duties as a judge - regardless of whether it was right or wrong.

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. Mayer case was not specified or recorded, making it impossible to provide a summary of such an opinion. The available records for this 1914 Supreme Court case do not include any information about a dissenting viewpoint from any of the justices involved in the decision-making process. It is therefore assumed that either there was no dissenting opinion or it wasn't documented as part of the court's official record.