In the case of Fisk v. Henarie (1891), the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Oregon. The plaintiff, Fisk, claimed that he had purchased and owned certain lands under an 1866 Act of Congress which granted lands to Oregon for establishing agricultural colleges. However, defendant Henarie argued that these lands were not available for purchase as they were reserved by an 1855 treaty between the United States and Native American tribes until formally opened for settlement by presidential proclamation - which hadn't occurred at the time of Fisk's alleged purchase. The court ruled in favor of Henarie, stating that although there was no explicit reservation clause within this particular treaty (as seen in other treaties), it was implied through its terms and conditions that these tribal lands would be withheld from public sale or disposal until officially declared open by presidential proclamation.

In the dissenting opinion for Fisk v. Henarie, it was argued that the court majority had erred in their interpretation of Oregon's state law regarding property rights and inheritance. The dissenting justices believed that under Oregon law, a wife did not automatically inherit her husband's property upon his death unless he died without a will (intestate). In this case, since Mr. Fisk left a valid will bequeathing his estate to Mrs. Henarie rather than his wife, they felt that Mrs. Henarie should have been recognized as the rightful owner of the disputed land parcel according to both federal and state laws at that time.