In the 1931 case of Hardeman v. Witbeck, the United States Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving land ownership in Texas. The plaintiff, Hardeman, claimed that he had purchased a tract of land from an individual who had received it as part of a Spanish grant before Mexico's independence and therefore held valid title to it. However, the defendant, Witbeck argued that this was not true because after Mexican Independence but prior to Texas' annexation by the U.S., Mexico had granted this same piece of land to another party whose heirs sold it to him (Witbeck). The court found in favor of Witbeck stating that under international law principles recognized by both Spain and Mexico at their respective times as sovereigns over Texas territory - namely those related with continuity and respect for pre-existing property rights - Mexican authorities were entitled to dispose lands within its jurisdiction regardless any previous unperfected Spanish grants. Therefore since there was no evidence showing completion or confirmation procedures regarding original Spanish grant when Texas became independent or later joined US Union; such incomplete right could not prevail against subsequent complete titles issued by competent authorities.

The dissenting opinion in the Hardeman v. Witbeck case argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling, which found Hardeman guilty of fraud for selling land with an undisclosed mortgage, was incorrect. The dissent contended that there was no evidence to suggest that Hardeman had intentionally deceived Witbeck during their transaction. They pointed out that both parties were experienced businessmen and should have been aware of the risks involved in such transactions. Furthermore, they noted that it is common practice for sellers not to disclose every detail about a property unless specifically asked by the buyer. Therefore, they believed this case did not constitute fraud and disagreed with penalizing Hardeman based on these grounds.