In the 1913 case of Work v. United Globe Mines, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with deciding on a dispute over mining claims in Arizona. The plaintiff, Frank H. Work, claimed that he had been defrauded by United Globe Mines and its associates who allegedly manipulated him into selling his shares at an undervalued price through deceitful means such as false representations about the mine's profitability and potential dividends. The defendants countered this claim arguing that they were not guilty of fraud because Mr. Work had failed to exercise due diligence before making his decision to sell his shares. The court ruled in favor of Mr.Work stating that even though he might have acted imprudently by not investigating further into the matter before selling his shares, it did not excuse or justify fraudulent actions taken by others against him if proven true.The court held that every person has a legal right to rely upon representations made to them without being required to investigate their truthfulness unless there are obvious reasons for suspicion. This ruling established important principles regarding business transactions and fraud protection laws which continue to be relevant today.

In the dissenting opinion for Work v. United Globe Mines, the justice disagreed with the majority's view that a mining claim could be considered real estate under Arizona law and therefore subject to taxation. The dissent argued that such claims were not property in any traditional sense but rather rights granted by federal law, which states had no authority to tax. They contended that these claims did not confer ownership of land or minerals therein until after discovery and extraction; thus they should be seen as potential future interests rather than present ones. Furthermore, it was pointed out that taxing them as real estate would discourage prospecting and development of mineral resources - contrary to Congress' intent when creating this system of public lands management.