The Supreme Court case Commonwealth of Virginia v. State of West Virginia in 1907 revolved around a boundary dispute between the two states. During the Civil War, counties from northwestern Virginia seceded and formed what is now known as West Virginia. However, there was disagreement over which state had jurisdiction over certain border counties - Berkeley and Jefferson. The Supreme Court ruled that these disputed areas were part of West Virginia based on an agreement made during the formation of West Virgina in 1863, where voters within those regions chose to join this new state rather than remain with old (Commonwealth) Virginia. This decision reinforced the principle that agreements made at time of partition are binding and enforceable by law.

In the dissenting opinion for the case Commonwealth of Virginia v. State of West Virginia, Justice Harlan disagreed with the majority's decision that West Virginia was not responsible for paying a portion of Virginia's pre-Civil War debt. He argued that when West Virginia became a separate state during the Civil War, it implicitly agreed to take on its fair share of this public debt as part of its obligations under federal law and constitutional principles. According to him, there were clear historical precedents indicating that new states should assume responsibility for their proportionate share of any existing public debts at the time they joined Union. Therefore, he believed it was unjust and against these established norms to allow West Virginia to avoid payment entirely.