In Board of Liquidation et al. v. McComb, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a state could be held liable for a debt incurred by a municipality. The case involved the City of New Orleans, which had issued bonds to finance the construction of a levee system. The bonds were purchased by the Board of Liquidation, which was created by the state of Louisiana to manage the city's debt. The Board of Liquidation sued the city for the unpaid debt, but the city argued that it was not liable for the debt because it had been incurred by the municipality, not the state. The Supreme Court held that the state of Louisiana was liable for the debt. The Court reasoned that the state had created the Board of Liquidation and had authorized it to purchase the bonds. The Court also noted that the state had a duty to ensure that the city's debt was paid, and that the state had a vested interest in the city's financial stability. Therefore, the Court concluded that the state was liable for the debt.

The dissenting opinion in Board of Liquidation et al. v. McComb was written by Justice Field, who argued that the majority's decision should be reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings. He believed that Louisiana had a valid claim to certain bonds issued by it prior to its admission into the Union as a state, which were subsequently sold without authority from Congress or any other competent authority. Furthermore, he argued that since these bonds were not authorized by Congress or any other competent body at the time they were issued, their sale could not be considered valid under either federal or state law and thus Louisiana still retained title to them despite their subsequent sale without proper authorization. In addition, Justice Field noted that even if there was some legal basis for selling these bonds after they had been issued without proper authorization from Congress or another competent body at the time of issuance, such sales would only have been valid if done with full disclosure of all relevant facts regarding ownership and transferability so as to protect purchasers against frauds perpetrated upon them through ignorance of material facts concerning those transactions.