In Insurance Company v. Nelson, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether an insurance company was liable for a policyholder’s death. The policyholder, Nelson, had taken out a life insurance policy with the insurance company. After Nelson’s death, his widow attempted to collect the policy benefits, but the insurance company refused to pay, claiming that Nelson had failed to disclose a prior medical condition. The Supreme Court held that the insurance company was liable for the policy benefits. The Court found that Nelson had not intentionally concealed any information from the insurance company, and that the insurance company had not asked Nelson any questions about his medical history. The Court also found that the insurance company had not taken any steps to investigate Nelson’s medical history before issuing the policy. Therefore, the Court concluded that the insurance company was liable for the policy benefits.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in Insurance Company v. Nelson, arguing that the majority had misconstrued the contract between the parties and failed to consider relevant evidence. He argued that a fair interpretation of the policy would have led to a different result than what was reached by his colleagues on the Court. The insurance company had issued an accident policy for $5,000 which provided coverage if Nelson died as a result of any "accident." At issue was whether or not death from pneumonia constituted an accident under this policy. The majority held that it did not because there were no external causes involved; however Justice Field disagreed with this conclusion and argued instead that since pneumonia is often caused by exposure to cold weather or other environmental factors, it should be considered an accidental injury covered under this particular policy. Furthermore, he noted that even though there may have been some pre-existing conditions present in Nelson's case at time of death, these conditions alone could not be said to have caused his demise without considering all other possible contributing factors such as environment and lifestyle choices made prior to contracting pneumonia - both of which are elements typically associated with accidents according to common law definitions used in similar cases throughout history. Ultimately Justice Field concluded that based on all available evidence presented before them at trial, including testimony from medical experts who stated they believed Nelson's death was due primarily (if not solely) due to environmental exposure rather than any pre-existing condition(s), then it should be determined as such and thus fall within scope of coverage provided by insurance company’s original agreement with him when issuing their accident policy for $5K