In the 1936 case of Aetna Insurance Co. v. Kennedy to the Use of Bogash, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of Aetna Insurance Company, reversing a decision made by lower courts that had awarded damages to Mr. Bogash for an accident he suffered while working on a ship insured by Aetna. The court held that under federal maritime law, which was applicable due to the incident occurring at sea, an insurance company could not be held directly liable for injuries sustained by workers on insured vessels unless there was explicit provision for such liability in its policy contract with the vessel owner or operator. As no such provision existed in this case between Aetna and their client who owned/operated the ship where Mr.Bogash got injured, it was determined that any claim should have been directed towards his employer rather than insurer.

In the dissenting opinion for AETNA INSURANCE CO. v. KENNEDY TO THE USE OF BOGASH, Justice Cardozo disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Pennsylvania law and its application to this case. He argued that under Pennsylvania law, a judgment against an insured party is not automatically binding on their insurer unless there has been collusion or fraud between the parties involved in obtaining it. The majority had ruled that Aetna Insurance was bound by a previous judgement against their policyholder, but Justice Cardozo believed this ruling ignored important aspects of state insurance laws designed to protect insurers from fraudulent claims and judgments obtained without their participation or consent.