In the Superintendent of Insurance of New York v. Bankers Life & Casualty Co., et al., 1971, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Superintendent of Insurance, who was acting as a liquidator for Manhattan Casualty Company (MCC). The case revolved around an alleged fraudulent sale and transfer scheme involving MCC's assets by its officers and directors to another company. This transaction resulted in significant financial loss for MCC while benefiting certain individuals involved in this deal. The court held that such deceptive practices were indeed manipulative and deceitful under Section 10(b) Securities Exchange Act, thus violating federal securities laws. It further stated that these violations could be pursued even if they did not directly involve any purchase or sale manipulation on a stock exchange or over-the-counter market but affected investors' interests indirectly.

In the dissenting opinion for Superintendent of Insurance of New York v. Bankers Life & Casualty Co., Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to allow a state superintendent to bring federal securities fraud claims on behalf of an insolvent insurance company expanded the scope and purpose of federal securities laws beyond their intended boundaries. He contended that these laws were designed to protect investors, not corporate entities or their receivers, from fraudulent practices in relation to buying and selling securities. Furthermore, he emphasized that allowing such suits could potentially open floodgates for litigation by other non-investor parties who suffered indirect harm due to securities frauds - a situation which Congress never intended when it enacted these laws. Therefore, according to him, this case should have been left within the purview of state law remedies rather than being brought under federal jurisdiction.