In Ellis & Others v. Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a tornado was an "act of God" and thus not covered by an insurance policy. The plaintiffs, Ellis and others, had purchased an insurance policy from Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company that covered their property in the event of a tornado. When a tornado struck their property, they filed a claim with the insurance company, but the company refused to pay, arguing that the tornado was an "act of God" and thus not covered by the policy. The Supreme Court held that a tornado was not an "act of God" and thus was covered by the insurance policy. The Court reasoned that a tornado was a natural phenomenon that could be predicted and thus was not an "act of God." The Court also noted that the insurance policy specifically covered tornadoes, and thus the insurance company was obligated to pay the claim. The Court held that the insurance company was liable for the damages caused by the tornado.

In the case of Ellis & Others v. Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a tornado constituted an “act of God” or a “visitation of Providence” as defined by insurance policies issued to plaintiffs. The majority opinion held that since tornadoes are not specifically mentioned in the policy language, they do not constitute an act of God and thus insurers were liable for damages caused by them. Justice Field dissented from this ruling on two grounds: firstly, he argued that it is impossible for insurers to anticipate every natural disaster which may occur; secondly, he contended that if tornadoes had been included in the policy language then premiums would have been higher than what was charged and therefore it would be unfair to hold insurers liable for something they did not agree upon when issuing policies. He concluded his dissent by stating that while courts should interpret contracts liberally so as to protect insureds from losses due to unforeseen events such as tornadoes, there must also be limits placed on liability so as not to place too great a burden on insurers who could never have anticipated such occurrences at time of contract formation.