In the case of Wilson v. Lambert, 1897, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land ownership and mining rights in Colorado. The plaintiff, Wilson, claimed that he had been unlawfully dispossessed of his property by Lambert after discovering valuable mineral deposits on it. However, Lambert argued that he had legally acquired the property through a patent from the U.S government under an act which allowed individuals to claim unoccupied lands for mining purposes. The court sided with Lambert stating that even though Wilson was first in possession of the land and discovered minerals thereon before any application for patent was made by anyone else; still if such discovery did not lead to compliance with all conditions precedent required by law to secure him title against all others including those holding patents from government then his right is inferior compared to one who has complied fully with these conditions as per Mining Act provisions.

In the dissenting opinion for Wilson v. Lambert, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling in favor of Lambert was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that there were significant issues with how evidence had been handled and interpreted during the trial process. They felt that these errors could have potentially influenced the jury's verdict and thus, justice may not have been served adequately. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority’s interpretation of certain legal principles related to property rights which formed a crucial part of this case. Therefore, they opined that Wilson should be given another opportunity for his case to be heard fairly and justly without any procedural or interpretational errors influencing its outcome.