In the 1894 U.S. Supreme Court case Warren v. Keep, the issue at hand was a dispute over inheritance and property rights following the death of an individual named William H. Vanderbilt. The plaintiff, George Henry Warren II, claimed that he had been wrongfully excluded from his rightful share of Vanderbilt's estate due to a misinterpretation of New York state law by defendant Edward C. Keep, who served as one of the executors for Vanderbilt's will. The main point in contention was whether or not certain bonds and stocks should be considered part of "personal property" under New York tax laws; if they were indeed personal property then they would have been subject to taxation which could potentially reduce their value significantly. Ultimately, it was ruled that these assets did constitute personal property according to state law and thus were taxable entities - this ruling went against Warren’s claim thereby favoring Keep’s interpretation regarding how such properties should be handled within probate proceedings.

In the dissenting opinion for Warren v. Keep, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax on stock dividends as income violated established principles of taxation and property rights. The dissenting justices contended that dividends are not income but rather a division of existing capital among shareholders. They asserted that taxing them as such would result in double taxation since corporations already pay taxes on their earnings before distributing any remaining profits to shareholders in the form of dividends. This view held that treating dividends as taxable income is essentially penalizing individuals for owning shares in profitable companies, which contradicts fundamental tenets of capitalism and free enterprise by discouraging investment and economic growth.