In Manning v. Insurance Company, the United States Supreme Court was asked to decide whether an insurance company was liable for damages caused by a fire that occurred on the insured's property. The insured had purchased a fire insurance policy from the insurance company, and the policy provided coverage for any losses caused by fire. The insured argued that the insurance company was liable for the damages caused by the fire, while the insurance company argued that the policy did not cover the damages. The Supreme Court held that the insurance company was liable for the damages caused by the fire. The Court found that the policy provided coverage for any losses caused by fire, and that the insured had fulfilled all of the requirements of the policy. The Court also found that the insurance company had not provided any evidence that the fire was caused by an excluded cause, such as arson. Therefore, the Court held that the insurance company was liable for the damages caused by the fire.

In Manning v. Insurance Company, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether an insurance company could be held liable for a fire that destroyed property belonging to one of its policyholders. The majority opinion found in favor of the insurance company, holding that there was insufficient evidence to prove causation between the fire and any negligence on behalf of the insurer. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that it should have been up to a jury—not judges—to determine if there had been any negligence on behalf of the insurer which caused or contributed to causing damage by way of fire. He further argued that even though no specific act or omission could be identified as having caused or contributed directly towards causing such damage, it did not necessarily mean that none existed; rather he believed it should have been left up for determination by a jury based upon all relevant facts and circumstances presented at trial.