In the Cone v. West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co., 1946, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of West Virginia Pulp & Paper Company (WVP&P). The case revolved around a contract dispute between WVP&P and its supplier, Cone Mills Corporation. Under their agreement, WVP&P was to purchase all of its required sulphite pulp from Cone for ten years at a fixed price per ton. However, due to World War II's impact on market conditions and prices for sulphite pulp skyrocketing beyond the agreed-upon rate, WVP&P sought to buy less than it had committed under the contract or pay lower prices than stipulated in their agreement. Cone sued for breach of contract but lost both at trial court level and upon appeal before reaching Supreme Court review. The high court upheld these rulings based on two main points: first that there were no provisions within the contract allowing changes due to unforeseen circumstances such as war; secondly that even if there were such clauses they would not apply since neither party could have reasonably foreseen WWII’s specific impacts on this industry when signing their deal back in 1935.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Cone v. West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co., argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established legal principles regarding jurisdiction and venue. The dissent contended that, under existing law, a corporation could be sued either where it is incorporated or where it has its principal place of business. In this case, neither location was within the state of South Carolina - thus making it improper for the plaintiff to bring suit there according to traditional rules governing jurisdiction and venue. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "transacting business," arguing that occasional sales do not constitute sufficient contact with a state to justify personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant.