Hunter v. Mutual Reserve Life Insurance
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. The facts are stated in the opinion. A State has the arbitrary power to exclude foreign insurance companies altogether from her territory. Hooper y. California, 155 XJ. S. 648, 655. The business of insurance is not commerce. The contract of insurance is not an instrumentality of commerce. Issuing a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. The facts are stated in the opinion. A State has the arbitrary power to exclude foreign insurance companies altogether from her territory. Hooper y. California, 155 XJ. S. 648, 655. The business of insurance is not commerce. The contract of insurance is not an instrumentality of commerce. Issuing a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce. Such contracts are not interstate transactions though the parties may be domiciled in different States. They do not constitute a part of the commerce between the States. Paul v. Virginia, 8…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice McKenna
This writ of error, is prosecuted to review a judgment of the Court of Appeals of the State of New York, modifying a judgment of the Supreme Court of that State. The judgment of the Court of Appeals was remitted to and madé the judgment of the latter court.
The action was brought- by Hunter, whom we shall call plain tiff ¿ against the insurance company, which we shall refer to as defendant', upon five judgments obtained in the State of North Carolina, recovered by one Emrick Wadsworth, a citizen of North Carolina, and owned by plaintiff. The judgments were recovered upon policies of insurance…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance v. SpratleySupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Commercial Mutual Accident Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Mutual Reserve Fund Life Assn. v. PhelpsSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Bedford v. Eastern Building and Loan Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1901
- Woodward v. . Mutual Reserve Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1904
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by52 opinions
- Riverside & Dan River Cotton Mills v. MenefeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Smyth v. Twin State Improvement Corp.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1951
- Minnesota Commercial Men's Assn. v. BennSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- West Publishing Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Provident Savings Life Assurance Society v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1915
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.