In Wilkinson v. McKimmie (1912), the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Oklahoma. The plaintiff, Wilkinson, claimed that he had purchased the land from an allottee of the Creek Nation who was given the property under an 1898 act of Congress. However, this sale occurred before five years had passed since allotment and without presidential approval - both conditions stipulated by law for such transactions to be valid. The defendant, McKimmie, later acquired title to the same tract through a different chain of conveyances which included a deed from another member of Creek Nation who also received it as part of his original allotment but after five years had elapsed and with presidential approval for its sale. The court ruled in favor of McKimmie stating that any transaction involving allotted lands within five years without presidential consent is void according to federal law governing these matters at that time; thus making Wilkinson's claim invalid despite being first in time.

In the dissenting opinion for Wilkinson v. McKimmie, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling denying an inheritance tax refund claim contradicted established legal principles and precedent. The dissent contended that when a person dies, their estate immediately passes to their heirs or devisees subject only to administration for payment of debts and expenses. Therefore, if an heir sells his interest before distribution is made by the executor or administrator, he sells what he got by descent or will - not something acquired from the executor or administrator. This interpretation would mean that no transfer tax could be levied on such transactions as they are not transfers of property by executors but rather sales of inherited property rights by heirs themselves. Thus, in this view, Mr.Wilkinson should have been entitled to his claimed refund.