In June 1950, United States military forces in Korea embarked upon an engagement that has been variously described as "war," "police action," "hostilities," and "defense against aggression." No declaration of war was made by Congress nor was a state of war proclaimed by the Chief Executive or our Communist adversaries. This unprecedented commitment of military forces in response to the recommendation of an international organization was consummated by unilateral Presidential action, with Congress only impliedly ratifying the step taken by enacting laws appropriating additional funds for the support of the armed forces in Korea. The ill-defined character of the conflict in Korea has raised many problems, not the least of which regards the meaning of the term "war" in contractual undertakings by insurers where it is used to limit or control the risk assumed. The hazards of war have been regarded as uninsurable under policies of personal accident insurance and insurers have not charged premiums for this risk. The purpose of this comment is to examine the judicial interpretations of the term "war" in insurance contracts and their implications for those who select policy language.
Richard W. Young S.Ed.,
INSURANCE-MEANING OF 'WAR" IN INSURANCE POLICIES,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol52/iss6/6