In the Boseman v. Connecticut General Life Insurance Co., 1936, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of Connecticut General Life Insurance Company. The case revolved around a dispute over an insurance policy claim following the death of Mr. Boseman who had taken out two life insurance policies with Connecticut General Life Insurance Company before his demise. After his death, Mrs. Boseman filed claims for both policies but was only paid for one as it was discovered that her husband's medical examination reports were falsified to hide his poor health condition at the time he applied for them - a fact unknown to her until after his passing and thus she sued on grounds of fraud and misrepresentation by omission from agents representing Connecticut General Life Insurance Co. The court held that since there was no evidence showing that representatives or employees from Connecticut General knew about Mr.Boseman’s actual health status when issuing him these policies, they could not be held liable for fraudulent concealment or misrepresentation by omission under Georgia law which requires proof beyond mere negligence or mistake but rather intentional deception.

In the dissenting opinion for Boseman v. Connecticut General Life Insurance Co., Justice McReynolds argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established principles of law and equity. He contended that it was unjust to allow an insurance company to retain premiums paid on a policy, which had been declared void due to misrepresentation by the insured party. According to him, when fraud or mistake is involved in contract formation, courts should aim at restoring parties as nearly as possible to their original positions before entering into such contracts; this includes refunding any premium payments made under fraudulent circumstances. The justice also criticized the majority's reliance on technicalities related with 'incontestability clauses' while ignoring broader principles of fairness and justice.