In the case of Cook v. Hart, 1892, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with deciding on a dispute over land ownership in Texas. The plaintiff, Cook, claimed that he had purchased the land from an individual who had acquired it through a grant by Mexico before Texas became part of the United States. However, Hart argued that this claim was invalid because there were no records to prove such a grant existed and thus he held rightful title to the property under Texan law. The court ruled in favor of Hart stating that even if such a Mexican grant did exist but wasn't recorded or recognized by Spanish or Mexican authorities at any point prior to Texas's independence (which is when its laws would have taken effect), then it could not be considered valid for establishing ownership rights under current US law.

In the dissenting opinion for Cook v. Hart, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a tax on out-of-state insurance companies doing business in Texas contradicted previous rulings by the Court. The dissent pointed out that this tax violated both the Commerce Clause and Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution because it discriminated against interstate commerce and deprived these companies of equal protection under law. They contended that while states have power to regulate businesses within their borders, they cannot impose burdensome taxes on foreign corporations simply because they are not domestic entities. This would create an unfair advantage for local businesses over those from other states, which goes against principles of free trade and competition inherent in our federal system. The dissent also noted inconsistencies between this ruling and earlier decisions where similar discriminatory taxes were struck down as unconstitutional.