In the case of Home Life Insurance Company v. Fisher in 1902, the U.S Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over an insurance policy claim. The plaintiff, Mrs. Fisher, was denied her late husband's life insurance payout by Home Life Insurance Company on grounds that he had misrepresented his health condition while applying for the policy. The company argued that Mr. Fisher had failed to disclose his past issues with alcoholism and liver disease which led to his death shortly after obtaining the policy. The court ruled in favor of Mrs.Fisher stating that it was incumbent upon insurers to ask specific questions about an applicant’s health during underwriting if they wished such information to be considered material facts affecting coverage or premium rates; general inquiries were not sufficient enough for this purpose. Furthermore, since there was no evidence suggesting Mr.Fisher intentionally deceived or defrauded the insurer regarding his medical history at time of application,the court held that non-disclosure did not constitute fraud nor warrant denial of benefits due under contract terms.The ruling established important precedent concerning duty-of-disclosure obligations between insureds and their insurers.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Home Life Insurance Company v. Fisher argued that the majority's decision was incorrect because it failed to properly consider and apply state law. The dissent contended that, under New York law, a life insurance policy is considered a contract for personal services rather than an asset or property right. Therefore, it cannot be transferred without the consent of both parties involved - namely, the insurer and insured party. In this particular case, there had been no such mutual agreement between Mr. Fisher (the insured) and Home Life Insurance Company when his wife attempted to transfer her interest in his policy to another individual after their divorce proceedings began but before they were finalized.