New England Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Woodworth, Administrator is a United States Supreme Court case from 1884. The case involved a dispute between the New England Mutual Life Insurance Company and the administrator of the estate of a deceased policyholder. The policyholder had taken out a life insurance policy with the company, and the administrator of the estate sought to collect the proceeds of the policy after the policyholder's death. The Supreme Court held that the administrator of the estate was entitled to the proceeds of the policy. The Court reasoned that the policyholder had paid the premiums on the policy and had a vested right to the proceeds of the policy. The Court further held that the policyholder's estate was entitled to the proceeds of the policy, regardless of any changes in the policyholder's financial circumstances that may have occurred after the policy was taken out. The Court's decision in this case established the principle that life insurance policies are contracts between the policyholder and the insurance company, and that the policyholder's estate is entitled to the proceeds of the policy upon the policyholder's death. This principle has been applied in numerous cases since this decision was handed down.

In New England Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Woodworth, Administrator, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a policy of life insurance issued by the appellant company to one John H. Smith had lapsed prior to his death due to nonpayment of premiums. The majority opinion held that it had not and that the respondent administrator was entitled to recover on behalf of Smith's estate under the terms of said policy. Justice Field dissented from this ruling, arguing that while there may have been some ambiguity in certain parts of the contract between parties as regards payment for premium installments after Smith's death, such ambiguities should be construed against those who drafted them - namely, here being New England Mutual Life Insurance Company - and thus any reasonable doubt should be resolved in favor of Woodworth as administrator for Smith's estate rather than allowing an insurer which failed to clearly specify its rights under a contract benefit at another party’s expense.