insurance company
Defined in 5 dictionaries — Case Law, U.S. Code, Bouvier (1914), Black's (1910), Black's (1891)
Definitions from Case Law
From 285 U.S. 182 - Bowers v. Lawyers Mortgage Co. · 1932Most cited · 149 citing opinions
The element of insurance may not properly be regarded as more than an incident thereof; it certainly is not sufficient to make respondent an 'insurance company' within the meaning of that phrase as it is commonly used and understood.
United States Code
12 U.S.C. § 1841 — for purposes of this chapter (4 versions over time)
For purposes of sections 1843 and 1844 of this title, the term “insurance company” includes any person engaged in the business of insurance to the extent of such activities.
12 U.S.C. § 3423 — in this section (2 versions over time)
the term “insurance company” has the meaning given the term in section 80a–2(a) of title 15;
12 U.S.C. § 5381 — in this subchapter
The term “insurance company” means any entity that is—
(A) engaged in the business of insurance;
(B) subject to regulation by a State insurance regulator; and
(C) covered by a State law that is designed to specifically deal with the rehabilitation, liquidation, or insolvency of an insurance company.
15 U.S.C. § 77B — in this subchapter
The term “insurance company” means a company which is organized as an insurance company, whose primary and predominant business activity is the writing of insurance or the reinsuring of risks underwritten by insurance companies, and which is subject to supervision by the insurance commissioner, or a similar official or agency, of a State or territory or the District of Columbia; or any receiver or similar official or any liquidating agent for such company, in his capacity as such.
15 U.S.C. § 80A — in this subchapter
“Insurance company” means a company which is organized as an insurance company, whose primary and predominant business activity is the writing of insurance or the reinsuring of risks underwritten by insurance companies, and which is subject to supervision by the insurance commissioner or a similar official or agency of a State; or any receiver or similar official or any liquidating agent for such a company, in his capacity as such.
15 U.S.C. § 80B — in this subchapter (4 versions over time)
“Investment company”, affiliated person, and “insurance company” have the same meanings as in the Investment Company Act of 1940 [15 U.S.C. 80a–1 et seq.]. “Control” means the power to exercise a controlling influence over the management or policies of a company, unless such power is solely the result of an official position with such company.
26 U.S.C. § 816 — in this section
comprise more than 50 percent of its total reserves (as defined in subsection (c)). For purposes of the preceding sentence, the term “insurance company” means any company more than half of the business of which during the taxable year is the issuing of insurance or annuity contracts or the reinsuring of risks underwritten by insurance companies.
26 U.S.C. § 831 — for purposes of this section (2 versions over time)
For purposes of this section, the term “insurance company” has the meaning given to such term by section 816(a).
Bouvier's Law Dictionary and Concise Encyclopedia
John Bouvier; revised by Francis Rawle · 1914
A company which issues policies of insurance, — an incorporated company, and either a stock company, a mutual one, or a mixture of the two. In a stock company, the members or stockholders pay in a certain capital which is liable for the contracts of the company. In a mutual company, the members are themselves the parties insured; in other words, all the members contribute premiums to the fund, which is liable for indemnity to each member for loss, according to the terms of the contract. In the mixed class, certain members, who may or may not be insured, contribute a certain amount of the capital, for which they hold certificates of shares, and are entitled to interest on the same at a stipulated rate, or to an agreed share of the surplus receipts, after the payment of losses and expenses, to be estimated at certain periods. mutual Insurance and Issuing both bonds of n^iutual insurance and stock policies based upon the capital. In New York it has been held that, under the statutes then in force regulating the formation of insurance companies and their organization, they could not be organized upon this plan so as to accept premium notes from some customers and cash premiums from others and assess the premium notes to pay losses in either branch of the business; Hart V. Achilles, 28 Barb. (N. T.) 576. See also White v. Haight, 16 N. Y. 310. Beneficial societies are sometimes held to be insurance companies withiu the meaning of the statutes regulating such companies; Berry v. Indemnity Co., 46 Fed. 439; and see State v. Benevolent Society, 72 Mo. 146; Com. V. Wetherbee, 106 Mass. 149; State v. Critchett, 37 Minn. 13, 32 N. W. 787; Golden Rule V. People, 118 111. 492, 9 N. E. 342. Where the main purpose of an order is that of life insurance, and insurance against sickness and disability, whatever, purposes it may have, it is amenable to the laws of that state relating to insurance companies; it therefore must comply with the requirements of the statutes of that state (if the order is organized under the laws of another state), as to foreign insurance companies, before it can do business in that state; State v. Nichols, 78 la. 747, 41 N. W. 4. But in Wisconsin an association incorporated for the purpose of fraternal benevolent insurance upon the cooperative or assessment plan was a charitable and benevolent order within the meaning of the statute which, in line with the defined policy of the state, was exempted from the general laws relating to life insurance; State V. Whitmore, 75 Wis. 332, 43 N. W. 1133. In Pennsylvania a foreign mutual aid association of the same character was held not liable for violation of the laws regulating insurance companies; Com. v. Mutual Aid Ass’n, 94 Pa. 481; and the same association was held not to be a mutual insurance company in Ohio, the statu of its incorporation; State V. Mutual Ass’n, 26 Ohio St. 19; so in many other states such associations are held not to be Insurance companies within the purview of the general insurance laws of the state; State v. Ass’n, 35 Kan. 61, 9 Pac. 956; Sherman v. Com., 82 Ky. 102; State V. Aid Ass’n, 59 la. 125, 12 N. W. 782; Commercial League Ass’n of America v. People, 90 111. 166; Supreme Council of Order of Chosen Friends v. Fairman, 62 How. Pr. (N. y.) 886; Blsey v. Relief Ass’n, 142 Mass. 224, 7 N. E. 844; Barbaro v. Occidental Grove, 4 Mo. App. 429; Rensenhouse v. Seeley, 72 Mich. 603, 40 N. W. 765; State V. Investment Co., 48 Minn. 110, 60 N. W. 1028. In Pennsylvania it was explicitly decided that an association organized not to do isees of Its members. Is not an insurance company; Northwestern Masonic Aid Ass’n V. Jones, 154 Pa. 99, 26 Atl. 253, 35 Am. St Rep. 810. A physicians’ defense company which contracts to pay the expenses of defending physicians against civil malpractice suits is an insurance company; Physicians’ Defense Co. V. Cooper, 199 Fed. 676, 118 C. C. A. 50; Physicians’ Defense Co. v. O’Brien, 100 Minn. 490, 111 N. W. 396; contra, Vredenburgh v. Defense Co., 126 111. App. 509; State v. Laylin, 73 Ohio St 90, 76 N. E. 567. A state has power to prohibit foreign insurance companies from doing business within its limits. It may impose such conditions as it pleases; Swing v. Lumber Co., 205 U. S. 275, 27 Sup. Ct 497, 61 L. Ed. 799; Whitfield V. Ins. Co., 205 U. S. 489, 27 Sup. Ct 578, 61 L. Ed. 895; Carfoll v. Ins. Co., 199 U. S. 401, 26 Sup. Ct. 66, 60 L. Ed. 246. Membership in a mutual company does not necessarily imply liability to assessment; Given v. Rettew, 162 Pa. 638, 29 Atl. 703. A surplus of such a company belongs equitably to the policy holders in the proportion in which they contributed to it and the directorate has no option to declare dividends; U. S. Life Ins. Co. v. Spinks, 96 S. W. 889, 2» Ky. L. Rep. 960, 13 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1053; contra, Greefif v. Assurance Society, 160 N. Y. 19, 54 N. E. 712, 46 L. R. A. 288, 73 Am. St Rep. 659. Dividends of a mutual life company returned to policy holders are not income and are not taxable as such; Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co. V. Herold, 198 Fed. 199; Fuller v. Ins. Co., 70 Conn. 647, 41 Atl. 4; L. R, 14 A. C. 381. See INSUBANCB.
Black's Law Dictionary
Henry Campbell Black, M.A. · 1910
A corporation or association whose business is to make contracts of insurance. They are either mutual companies or stock companies. A "mutual" insurance company is one whose fund for the payment of losses consists not of capital subscribed or furnished by outside parties, but of premiums mutually contributed by the parties insured, or in other words, one in which all persons insured become members of the association and contribute either cash or assessable premium antes, or both, to a common fund, out of which each is entitled to indemnity in case of loss. My-gatt v. Insurance Co., 21 N. Y. 65; Insurance Ca. v. Hoge, 21 How. 35, 16 L. Ed. 61; Given v. Rettew, 162 Pa. 638, 29 Atl. 708. A "stock" company la one organized according to the usual form of business corporations, having a capital stock divided into shares, which, with current income and accumulated surplus, constitutes the fund for the payment of losses, policy-holders paying fixed premiums and not being members of the association uni ess they also happen to be stockholders.
Defined under Insurance in Black's Law Dictionary.
A Dictionary of Law
Henry Campbell Black · 1891
A corpo ration or association whose business is to