In the 1902 case of Sena v. United States, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a matter involving land grants in New Mexico under Spanish and Mexican rule before it became part of the United States. The plaintiff, Sena, claimed ownership to certain lands based on an alleged grant from Spain's King Ferdinand VII in 1815. However, no official documentation could be produced as evidence for this claim other than testimonies from elderly individuals who asserted that they had seen such documents decades earlier. The court held that mere assertions without concrete documentary proof were insufficient to establish title over these lands. It was emphasized by Justice Edward Douglass White that while oral testimony might be accepted where written records have been lost or destroyed due to time or catastrophe, there must still be clear and convincing evidence presented which leaves no room for reasonable doubt about its authenticity and accuracy. Therefore, because Sena failed to provide substantial evidence supporting his claims of ownership granted by Spain prior to American acquisition of New Mexico territory through Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848), his appeal was dismissed.

In the dissenting opinion for Sena v. United States, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's interpretation of a treaty between Mexico and the U.S. was incorrect. He believed that under this treaty, land grants made by Spain or Mexico before 1848 were to be recognized as valid by American courts unless they had been previously rejected by Spanish or Mexican authorities. In his view, it was not necessary for these grants to have been confirmed by an official survey in order to be considered valid; instead, he held that any grant which had not been explicitly invalidated should be presumed legal under American law. Therefore, he disagreed with the majority's decision to reject Sena's claim on this basis.