The U.S. Supreme Court case State of North Carolina v. State of Tennessee in 1915 revolved around a boundary dispute between the two states. The disagreement was over an area known as the "Unaka Mountain Range," which both states claimed to be within their respective territories based on different interpretations of colonial-era charters and treaties with Native American tribes. After extensive review, the court ruled in favor of Tennessee, basing its decision on historical precedent and evidence that showed that for nearly a century prior to this litigation, Tennessee had exercised jurisdiction over this territory without any objection from North Carolina until recently. The court held that such long acquiescence could serve as conclusive proof of ownership under international law principles applied domestically among US States.

In the dissenting opinion for the case of State of North Carolina v. State of Tennessee, it was argued that there were significant errors in determining the boundary line between these two states. The justice believed that a more accurate survey should have been conducted to establish this border, rather than relying on historical documents and maps which may not be entirely reliable or precise. He also expressed concern over potential implications for other state boundaries if such an approach was accepted as standard practice by the court. Furthermore, he felt that North Carolina had not been given adequate opportunity to present its case and defend its interests during proceedings due to procedural issues with how evidence was presented and considered by the court.