In the case of Gaston, Williams & Wigmore of Canada, Ltd. v. Warner in 1922, the U.S Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a Canadian corporation could be sued in New York for an alleged breach of contract that occurred in Canada. The plaintiff argued that since the defendant had business operations and assets within New York State, it should be subject to its jurisdiction. However, the court ruled against this argument stating that merely having business dealings or property within a state does not automatically make one liable to legal action there unless those activities are directly related to the cause at hand - which they were not in this instance. Therefore, it held that under principles of international law and comity among nations (mutual respect between countries), a foreign corporation cannot be subjected to suit on causes originating outside jurisdiction where it is doing business unless expressly agreed upon by both parties involved.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Gaston, Williams & Wigmore of Canada, Ltd. v. Warner argued that the majority's decision to uphold a lower court ruling against the defendant was incorrect due to jurisdictional issues. The dissenting justices believed that because the alleged fraudulent activities occurred outside U.S territory and involved non-U.S citizens, it should not fall under American jurisdiction. They also contended that upholding such a verdict could set a dangerous precedent for future cases involving international disputes and potentially infringe upon other nations' sovereignty rights by asserting U.S legal authority where it may not be applicable or appropriate.