In Insurance Company v. Dunn, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether an insurance company was liable for a loss caused by a fire that occurred on the insured's property. The insured had purchased a policy from the insurance company that provided coverage for losses caused by fire. The insured argued that the insurance company was liable for the loss because the fire was caused by a defect in the insured's property. The insurance company argued that the policy did not cover losses caused by defects in the insured's property. The Supreme Court held that the insurance company was liable for the loss. The Court reasoned that the policy did not explicitly exclude losses caused by defects in the insured's property, and that the insurance company had not provided any evidence that the policy was intended to exclude such losses. The Court also noted that the policy was intended to provide coverage for losses caused by fire, and that the fire was the proximate cause of the loss. Therefore, the Court held that the insurance company was liable for the loss.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Insurance Company v. Dunn, arguing that the majority had misinterpreted a provision of an insurance policy and failed to consider its plain language. He argued that when interpreting contracts, courts should look at what was actually written rather than attempting to infer meaning from other sources or making assumptions about intent. In this case, he believed that the contract's language clearly stated that it only applied if there were two deaths within one year as a result of one accident; since there had been three deaths over multiple years due to separate accidents, he felt it was wrong for the court to interpret this clause differently and hold against the insurer. Justice Field concluded by stating his belief that such interpretation would lead insurers into uncertainty regarding their obligations under similar policies in future cases and thus be detrimental both for them and those seeking coverage through such policies.