In the case of Greenwich Insurance Co. v. Providence and Stonington Steamship Co., the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a steamship company was liable for damages caused by a fire that occurred on one of its vessels. The steamship company had taken out an insurance policy with the Greenwich Insurance Company to cover any losses that might occur due to fire. The steamship company argued that the fire was caused by an act of God and therefore, the insurance company was not liable for the damages. The Supreme Court held that the steamship company was liable for the damages caused by the fire. The Court reasoned that the insurance policy was intended to cover any losses that might occur due to fire, regardless of the cause. The Court further held that the steamship company was not entitled to any exemption from liability due to the act of God. The Court concluded that the insurance company was entitled to recover the damages from the steamship company.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Greenwich Insurance Co. v. Providence and Stonington Steamship Co, arguing that the majority had misinterpreted a provision of an insurance policy issued by Greenwich to cover losses resulting from collisions between vessels owned or operated by Providence and Stonington. He argued that the plain language of the policy did not support its interpretation as excluding coverage for any collision caused solely by negligence on behalf of either vessel's crew, but rather only excluded those collisions which were caused exclusively through fault or neglect on behalf of one party without any contributory fault or neglect on part of another vessel involved in the incident. Justice Field further noted that such an interpretation was consistent with prior case law regarding similar policies, including The City Of New York (1876) and The John Jay (1883). As such, he concluded that it would be unjust to deny coverage under these circumstances given how both parties shared responsibility for causing this particular collision at issue in this case.