In Telfener v. Russ, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over land ownership in Texas. The case revolved around an 1830 Mexican land grant to Juan Mora, which was later sold to Joseph Telfener, an Italian investor and railroad builder. After Texas became part of the United States, it recognized this grant but reduced its size significantly from what was originally granted by Mexico. A man named Russ claimed ownership of a portion of this land based on Texan law that allowed for acquisition through long-term use or possession (also known as "adverse possession"). The court ruled in favor of Telfener stating that under international law principles incorporated into US law after annexation, the original Mexican grant superseded any claim by adverse possession prior to annexation because at that time it wasn't possible for American citizens to acquire good title via adverse possession against Spanish/Mexican grants.

In the dissenting opinion for Telfener v. Russ, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling against an Italian company building a railroad in Texas was incorrect. The dissenters believed that there were significant errors made by the trial court which should have led to a reversal of its judgment. They contended that evidence presented at trial showed clear intent on both sides to form and execute a contract, contrary to what the majority concluded. Furthermore, they disagreed with how certain pieces of evidence were interpreted and felt these misinterpretations significantly influenced the outcome of this case unfairly against Telfener Company. Thus, they would have reversed the judgement instead.