In the 1914 case of Hartford Life Insurance Company v. IBS, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of Hartford Life Insurance Company. The dispute arose when a policyholder died and his beneficiary claimed that they were entitled to receive double indemnity under an accident insurance policy issued by Hartford. However, the company argued that the death was not accidental but rather due to natural causes (heart disease). The court agreed with this argument based on medical evidence presented during trial proceedings which indicated that heart disease had been a contributing factor in causing death. Therefore, it held that since there was no direct causal link between any accident and death as required by terms of insurance contract for payment of double indemnity benefits, such claim could not be sustained legally.

In the dissenting opinion for Hartford Life Insurance Company v. IBS, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law regulating insurance contracts interfered with interstate commerce and thus violated the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The dissenting justices believed that insurance policies were not merely local transactions but involved elements of interstate trade, as they often covered risks spread across multiple states and premiums were frequently sent across state lines. They contended that by allowing individual states to regulate these contracts in potentially conflicting ways, this could create an untenable situation where insurers would be subject to inconsistent rules depending on which state's laws applied - a result contrary to the purpose of having a federal system overseeing interstate commerce. Therefore, they felt such regulation should fall under federal jurisdiction rather than being left up to each individual state.