Texas Farmers Insurance Company, Petitioner v. Daisy Murphy, Respondent

Summary

The Texas Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals, holding that Daisy Murphy, an innocent co‑insured, is contractually entitled to recover one‑half of the insurance proceeds despite her husband’s intentional arson, because the policy contains no applicable exclusion and the insurer waived its concealment‑fraud defense. The Court also rejected the public‑policy argument that a post‑arson partition should bar recovery, noting that the contract right prevails. Justice ENOCH dissented, arguing the rule lets an arsonist benefit, and Justice HECHT concurred, criticizing the majority’s reliance on public policy.