Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Lumber Underwriters Of New York v. Rife

• 1914 • 237 U.S. 605 • White Court
In the case of Lumber Underwriters of New York v. Rife (1914), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Lumber Underwriters, reversing a decision made by the Kentucky Court of Appeals. The dispute arose from an insurance policy issued by Lumber Underwriters to Rife's sawmill business. After suffering losses due to fire damage, Rife claimed compensation under his insurance policy but was denied on grounds that he had violated certain conditions stipulated in the contract - specifically,...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief White Court
Term: 1914
Docket: 279
237 U.S. 605
35 S. Ct. 717
59 L. Ed. 1140
1915 U.S. LEXIS 1373
Argued: May 13, 1915

Lumber Underwriters Of New York v. Rife

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Lumber Underwriters of New York v. Rife (1914), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Lumber Underwriters, reversing a decision made by the Kentucky Court of Appeals. The dispute arose from an insurance policy issued by Lumber Underwriters to Rife's sawmill business. After suffering losses due to fire damage, Rife claimed compensation under his insurance policy but was denied on grounds that he had violated certain conditions stipulated in the contract - specifically, maintaining a 'watchman' at all times and operating a steam boiler without proper supervision or safeguards against fire risks. The state court sided with Rife initially; however, upon appeal to the Supreme Court it was determined that these were material breaches which justified denial of claim by insurer as per terms agreed upon within their contract.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Lumber Underwriters of New York v. Rife, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a Kentucky law requiring foreign corporations to consent to service of process on an in-state agent as a condition of doing business within its borders violated due process rights. The dissent contended that this requirement essentially forced foreign corporations into surrendering their constitutional right not to be sued outside their home state without proper jurisdictional basis. It was further asserted that such laws could lead states towards enacting legislation designed primarily at coercing out-of-state entities into submitting themselves wholly under local jurisdictions, thereby undermining interstate commerce and federalism principles inherent in the U.S Constitution.

Opinion written by Justice OWHolmes
Decided: Jun 01, 1915
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms