In the case of Wilbur, Secretary of the Interior v. United States ex rel. Krushnic (1929), the Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over mining rights in public lands. The plaintiff, Krushnic, had obtained a patent for land under an 1872 law that allowed private citizens to claim mineral-rich public lands for free if they agreed to develop them. However, after obtaining his patent and beginning development work on it, he discovered that there were no valuable minerals present in his plot of land as initially thought. Krushnic then sought to have his title confirmed by invoking another statute which provided relief when patents were issued based on incorrect surveys or descriptions but was denied by Secretary of Interior Wilbur who argued that this particular statute did not apply to mining claims. The Supreme Court sided with Krushnic stating that even though Congress intended these laws primarily for agricultural purposes rather than mining ones; however since nothing in their wording specifically excluded miners from benefiting from them - hence they should be applied universally regardless of what type of claimant one is.

In the dissenting opinion for Wilbur, Secretary of the Interior v. United States ex rel. Krushnic, Justice Holmes argued that the majority's interpretation of mining laws was incorrect and overly restrictive. He contended that these laws were intended to encourage exploration and development of mineral resources by granting rights to those who discovered them on public lands. According to him, this purpose would be undermined if miners were denied access to their claims through tunnels dug into adjoining unclaimed land (as in this case). He disagreed with the majority's view that such tunneling constituted unauthorized possession or occupation under an 1872 law prohibiting it unless a discovery had been made within its limits - arguing instead that it should be seen as incidental use necessary for enjoyment of validly acquired rights elsewhere.