The case of Walla Walla City v. Walla Walla Water Company in 1898 revolved around a dispute between the city of Walla Walla, Washington and the local water company over rights to use certain water sources for public purposes. The city had granted an exclusive franchise to the company, but later attempted to construct its own waterworks system using some of these same resources. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the water company, stating that while municipalities have inherent powers related to their function as governmental entities, they cannot infringe upon private contracts or property rights without due process under law. Therefore, despite its status as a municipality with responsibilities towards public welfare including provision of clean drinking water, it could not violate contractual obligations made earlier with the private entity i.e., the Water Company.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Walla Walla City v. Walla Walla Water Company argued that the city did not have a right to take over the water company's property without compensation. The justice maintained that while municipalities do hold certain rights, these should not infrive upon private property rights protected by law. They contended that if a municipality could simply seize control of privately owned utilities whenever it deemed necessary, this would discourage investment and innovation in public infrastructure projects due to fear of uncompensated appropriation by local governments. This view held firm on upholding constitutional protections for private property against potential abuses from government entities.