In the case of Woodring, Secretary of War, et al. v. Wardell, Receiver (1939), the United States Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving federal jurisdiction over state court proceedings. The issue arose from a collision between an Army truck and a civilian vehicle in Wyoming; the driver of the civilian car was killed and his estate's receiver sued for damages in state court. The government argued that under federal law it had exclusive jurisdiction to hear such cases because they involved military personnel acting within their official duties. However, this argument was rejected by both lower courts. The Supreme Court reversed these decisions and held that when suits are brought against U.S officials for acts done in their official capacity or under color of legal authority - as was true here - those suits are deemed to be against the U.S itself if it would have liability where its officers were not immune. Therefore, since Congress has waived sovereign immunity only with respect to certain actions filed directly against US in Federal Courts but not with respect to others filed elsewhere like State Courts or foreign tribunals – thus making them non-removable – this suit should have been dismissed by Wyoming’s courts without prejudice.

In the dissenting opinion for Woodring, Secretary of War, et al. v. Wardell, Receiver (1939), Justice Black argued that the majority's decision to allow a receiver appointed by a federal court to sue in state courts was an overreach of power and could potentially lead to conflicts between federal and state jurisdictions. He contended that such receivers should only be allowed to bring suits in the same jurisdiction where they were appointed unless explicitly authorized by Congress or if there is clear evidence showing it would not interfere with local laws or policies. The justice also expressed concern about potential abuses of this power as well as its impact on states' rights and sovereignty.