In the 1904 case of Chrisman v. Miller, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land rights in Oregon. The plaintiff, Chrisman, claimed ownership of certain lands based on a patent issued by the U.S government under an act providing for homestead entries. However, Miller also claimed ownership to these lands through purchase from individuals who had settled and improved upon them before they were surveyed by federal authorities or opened for settlement under any law of Congress. The court held that settlers could not acquire valid title to unsurveyed public lands simply through occupation and improvement; formal entry was required after surveying was completed and such lands were officially declared open for settlement by appropriate governmental authority. Therefore, it upheld Chrisman's claim as he had followed due process according to existing laws at that time.

In the dissenting opinion for Chrisman v. Miller, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established principles of law and equity. He contended that under common law, a mortgagee has no right to possession until default occurs or is imminent - something not present in this case. Furthermore, he asserted that even if there were an agreement allowing immediate possession by the mortgagee (which wasn't clear), it would be void as against public policy because it could enable oppressive conduct towards mortgagors who are often at disadvantageous positions during negotiations. The justice also disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Washington state laws on foreclosure proceedings and their application to this case; he believed they did not permit such actions without court intervention unless explicitly stated in contracts between parties involved which again was absent here.