In Willis v. Eastern Trust and Banking Company, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Maine. The plaintiff, Willis, claimed that he had purchased the disputed property from its original owner before it was sold to another party by an executor of the estate who did not have legal authority to do so. The defendant, Eastern Trust and Banking Company argued they were bona fide purchasers for value without notice of any defect in their title when they bought it from this second party. The lower court ruled in favor of Willis but on appeal, the Supreme Court reversed this decision stating that under Maine law at that time (1897), even if an executor sells real estate without proper authority or contrary to his trust duties; such sale is valid against all persons except those interested in the estate who didn't give consent or weren't notified about it beforehand - unless there's fraud involved which wasn’t proven here.

The dissenting opinion in the Willis v. Eastern Trust and Banking Company case argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with previous rulings regarding maritime liens. The dissenting justices believed that a ship owner should not be held liable for debts incurred by a charterer, especially when there is no explicit agreement between them to this effect. They contended that under maritime law, only those who provide necessaries to a vessel have lien rights against it, and these rights are limited to situations where the supplies were ordered by an authorized person on behalf of the ship owner. In this case, they felt that since Willis had not personally ordered or agreed to pay for any repairs made on his vessel while it was chartered out, he should not be held responsible for paying these costs back to Eastern Trust and Banking Company.