Skip to main content
· 12/15/1913

New York Life Insurance v. Deer Lodge County

Citations

  • 231 U.S. 495
  • 34 S. Ct. 167
  • 58 L. Ed. 332
  • 1913 U.S. LEXIS 2527

Syllabus

<p>The sanction of the rule of stare decisis urges this court against reversing a long series of decisions where state legislation has been enacted in reliance thereon, and the reversal would involve the promulgation of a new rule of constitutional inhibition .on state legislation necessitating readjustment of policy and laws.</p> <p>After reviewing Paul v. Virginia, 8 Wall. 168, decided by this court in 1868, and other cases in which that case was followed, this court adheres to the decisions in those cases to the effect that the issuing of an insurance policy is not commerce but a personal contract, and that the regulations of. a State in regard to policies delivered in the State by non-resident insurance corporations and taxes imposed on said corporations, are not, if otherwise legal, unconstitutional as a búrden upon interstate commerce. . The Lottery' Cases, 188 U. S. 321, and International Textbook Co. v. Pigg, 217 U. S. 91¡ distinguished. /</p> <p>The fact that there are great numbers of transactions therein does not give to a business any other character than magnitude; it cannot transform a business from one which is subject to state regulation to one beyond that regulation as interstate.</p> <p>The fact that the mails are used in consummating contracts for insurance between a corporation in one State and the insured in another, does not give character to the' negotiations or the contract nor does it make the latter interstate commerce.</p> <p>The fact that after the insured receives his policy of insurance it becomes subject to sale and transfer, does not make the business of issuing it commerce.</p> <p>The statute of Montana imposing a tax on insurance corporations doing business in the State measured by the excess of premiums received over losses and expenses incurred within the State, is not unconstitutional as a burden on, or interference with, interstate commerce.</p>

Judges: Hughes, McKenna, Van Devanteb

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.