In the 1915 case of Cardona v. Quinones, the United States Supreme Court addressed a dispute over property rights in Puerto Rico. The plaintiff, Cardona, claimed that he had purchased land from Quinones and paid for it in full but was never given possession of the property due to an alleged error by a notary public during the transaction process. The defendant argued that no such sale took place and denied receiving any payment for said land. After reviewing evidence presented at trial level courts, including testimony from witnesses who confirmed seeing money exchanged between parties involved as well as documents supporting this claim, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Cardona stating there was sufficient proof indicating a valid contract existed between both parties despite absence of formal documentation or deed transfer due to notarial errors.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Cardona v. Quinones argued that the Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction to review a decision made by the Insular Courts of Puerto Rico, as they were created by Congress and not under direct control of federal authority. The dissent further contended that since Puerto Rico was an unincorporated territory, its courts should be treated similarly to those in foreign countries where decisions are final unless reviewed on appeal within their own system. Therefore, it was suggested that any issues with rulings from these courts should be addressed through legislative action rather than judicial review.