In the case of Wadsworth v. Adams in 1890, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership and inheritance rights. The plaintiff, Wadsworth, claimed that he was entitled to certain lands based on his interpretation of two wills - one from his grandfather and another from an uncle who had inherited the property first. However, defendant Adams argued that under Michigan law (where the properties were located), she was rightful owner as her husband's heir after he died intestate (without a valid will). The lower court ruled in favor of Adams but this decision was appealed by Wadsworth. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of lower court stating that according to Michigan laws regarding descent and distribution at time when deaths occurred; it is clear that Mrs. Adams' husband became sole owner upon death of his mother (Wadsworth’s aunt) irrespective of any provisions made in earlier wills which attempted to bypass him or limit control over property during lifetime only. Therefore, upon his death without leaving a will or children behind; all properties passed onto Mrs.Adams as per state law.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Wadsworth v. Adams argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings and interpretations of the law. It contended that, according to established legal principles, a person who purchases property without knowledge of any existing liens or encumbrances should not be held responsible for them. The dissent further asserted that it is unjust to penalize innocent purchasers for failing to discover hidden claims against their property, especially when those claims were not properly recorded as required by law. Therefore, they believed that Mr. Wadsworth should have been allowed to keep his land free from Mrs. Adams' claim because he bought it without knowing about her mortgage and she had failed to record her lien correctly.