In the case of Potts v. Wallace (1892), the U.S. Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Alabama, which was initially granted by Spain to an individual named Forbes and later sold to another person named Leslie. The main issue revolved around whether or not this grant was valid under Spanish law at that time, as it occurred shortly before Spain ceded Florida to the United States in 1819. The court ruled against Potts who claimed title through a subsequent purchase from Leslie's heirs, stating that he failed to prove his claim sufficiently because there were no documents showing that Forbes had fulfilled conditions required for such grants under Spanish law - namely inhabitation and cultivation of the land within six months after receiving it. Therefore, Wallace retained possession of the disputed property.

In the dissenting opinion for Potts v. Wallace, Justice Brewer argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring railroad companies to provide separate accommodations for white and black passengers was fundamentally flawed. He contended that such laws were inherently discriminatory and violated both the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and principles of natural justice. According to Justice Brewer, these laws not only perpetuated racial segregation but also unfairly burdened railroads with additional costs associated with providing separate facilities. Furthermore, he pointed out inconsistencies in how these laws were applied - while they mandated separation on trains within a state, they did not apply to interstate travel or other forms of public transportation like streetcars or steamboats.