In the case of Vogt v. Graff and Vogt, 1911, the Supreme Court was asked to consider a dispute over inheritance rights. The plaintiff, John Vogt Jr., claimed that he was entitled to his father's estate as his only surviving son. However, the defendants - two daughters from his father's first marriage - argued that they were also rightful heirs under German law (the deceased had been a resident of Germany). The court ruled in favor of the sisters on appeal after initially siding with John Jr., stating that although he would have been considered an heir under American law due to being born out-of-wedlock during his father’s second marriage which is not recognized by German law; it did not apply here because at issue was property located in Germany where their laws applied instead. Therefore, according to German Civil Code provisions regarding illegitimate children and inheritance rights at this time period, they could not inherit unless there were no other legitimate descendants or relatives left alive who could claim such right.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Vogt v. Graff and Vogt argued that the majority's decision was incorrect because it failed to properly interpret a key provision of the contract at issue. The dissent believed that this provision, which related to how profits from a business venture would be divided between the parties, should have been interpreted more broadly than what was done by the majority. This broader interpretation would have allowed for a different distribution of profits, one that favored Mr. Vogt rather than Mr. Graff and his associates as decided by majority ruling. Furthermore, they disagreed with how certain evidence had been handled during trial proceedings and felt there were errors made in instructing jury members on legal principles relevant to this case.