# Fairfield Insurance Co. v. Stephens Martin Paving, LP

> Texas Supreme Court · February 15, 2008 · 51 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 491

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9512992

## Case

- **Full name:** FAIRFIELD INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. STEPHENS MARTIN PAVING, LP; Carrie Bennett, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Roy Edward Bennett, Deceased, and as Next Friend of Lane Edward Bennett, Cody Lee Bennett, and April Anne Bennett, Minors, Appellees
- **Court:** Texas Supreme Court
- **Decided:** February 15, 2008
- **Citations:** 51 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 491; 246 S.W.3d 653; 2008 Tex. LEXIS 123; 2008 WL 400397
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Johnson
- **Judges:** Brister, Hecht, Jefferson, Johnson, Medina, O'Neill, Wainwright
- **Cited by:** 151 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9512992

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that “this Court has held in a number of cases over the years that public policy clearly disfavors certain types of agreements” and citing Zuniga with the parenthetical “holding that assignment of legal malpractice claims was against public policy”
- recognizing that these two types of insurance are different
- recognizing that some statutes reflect the legislature’s decision that public policy requires certain conditions to be met before an agreement may be enforceable

## Opinion text

Justice JOHNSON,
concurring in part.
I join the Court’s opinion as to parts I, II and IV. However, I consider part III of the opinion to go further than necessary in responding to the certified question presented even in light of Texas Constitution article V, section 3-c. Accordingly, I do not join part III and express neither agreement nor disagreement with its substance.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9512992. Public record. Not legal advice.