Lisa Fields and Lisa Hill faced a critical legal and business decision in 2023 that would have a monumental impact on the future of their companies.
The Texas Legislature passed a law that prohibited managed vision care companies such as VSP from communicating directly with their customers or plan members about cost-savings programs if those efforts were viewed as steering clients toward specific in-network providers.
“We recognized right away that this legislation posed an existential threat to our business,” Lisa Hill, Visionworks general counsel of San Antonio-based Visionworks and deputy general counsel of VSP, told The Texas Lawbook. “I felt the constitutional rights of my company were being violated.”
Hill and Fields, the deputy general counsel at Visionworks’ parent company, VSP, recognized that suing the state of Texas to block the law would be extremely expensive — likely costing millions of dollars in legal fees — and that taking such overt, public action would be completely out of character for their two operations, which had a history of avoiding high-profile litigation and fostering friendly relationships with regulators and political leaders, especially in Texas.
“This was not an easy decision, but we decided to move forward,” Fields said. “But we knew we had to take a direct attack, and we knew it would be a bold move to sue the state. And we knew we had to make a statement that we would not have our constitutional rights trampled.”
In August 2023, VSP and Visionworks joined two industry association groups in filing a federal lawsuit naming Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Texas Insurance Commissioner Cassie Brown and alleging the law violated their First Amendment rights to commercial free speech.
The plaintiffs convinced the federal judge in the Eastern District of Texas to issue a temporary injunction to prevent the law from being implemented, but then the Texas AGs office appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit — one of the most conservative courts in the U.S. where Paxton and Texas officials have repeatedly scored huge legal victories.
“This case has been the highlight of my legal career,” Fields told The Lawbook. “Never in my life did I think that I, as a corporate in-house lawyer, would ever be involved in such a significant constitutional law case. As corporate in-house counsel, we do not ever sit around discussing the First Amendment and free speech issues very often.”
“We have now,” Hill said laughing.
On May 23, 2025, Hill and Fields received an email at 10:43 a.m. from Dykema partner Christopher Kratovil.
The subject line: “Good news from New Orleans.”
A three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit had unanimously awarded Visionworks a complete victory.
“I jumped up and did a little victory dance around my home office,” Fields said.
The Association of Corporate Counsel’s San Antonio Chapter and The Lawbook are honoring Fields, Hill and the litigation team at Dykema with the 2025 San Antonio Corporate Counsel Award for Business Litigation of the Year.
The VSP Vision and Dykema teams will be honored along with 11 other corporate counsel award recipients on Nov. 6. The Business Litigation of the Year Award is one of two honors that recognizes the work of both the in-house counsel and their outside lawyers.
Premium Subscriber Q&A: Fields and Hill identify common missteps for outside counsel and highlight “standout days” at VSP.
“The Fifth Circuit victory secured by Vision Service Plan stands as a textbook example of business litigation that reshapes an industry, protects a vital business model and sets nationwide precedent,” said Dykema partner Daniel Harkins, who nominated Fields and Hill for the award. “The case … merits Business Litigation of the Year honors because it combines high stakes, sophisticated constitutional advocacy and industrywide impact, all while demonstrating the capacity to defend against existential threats.”
“This case’s influence will ripple across multiple sectors,” Harkins said. “Managed care organizations, insurers and vertically integrated providers in health care, dental and pharmacy benefit management now have a blueprint for defending their operations against restrictive legislation. Legislators considering similar measures will have to reckon with the Fifth Circuit’s clear message: Restrictions on truthful, procompetitive communication cannot be justified merely by labeling them as consumer-protection measures.”
“Moreover, the ruling indirectly benefits consumers,” he added. “By safeguarding VSP’s ability to share cost-saving information, the decision helps ensure that vision care remains affordable and accessible.”
The Early Years
Lisa Fields went to college at Arizona State and then graduated magna cum laude from California’s Whittier Law School in 1997.
After four years practicing trial law in California defending construction defect, toxic mold and asbestos lawsuits, Fields joined Beutler Corporation as its general counsel in 2002.
Five years later, she joined VSP at its Sacramento headquarters, where she has been for more than 18 years.
Scott Hansen, a senior lawyer at Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren in Milwaukee, said Fields is “wise, trusted and pragmatic” with a deep “devotion to the company.”
“Those attributes allowed her to guide VSP through difficult litigations, complex regulatory hurdles and strategic evolution,” Hansen said. “She communicated challenging, sometimes unwelcome, news in ways that allowed her colleagues to understand and follow her guidance rather than dismiss what they did not want to hear — along with the messenger.”
“Sometimes her role was lonely and difficult, so unwelcome was the message,” he said. “Yet her character and passion for VSP, the company to which she dedicated her career, saw her through. And VSP is the better for it.“
Lisa Hill was born in San Diego, but her family moved to Kingsville in South Texas when she was only 2 years old. Her father was an engineer at Celanese Corporation and her mother taught English.
While there were no lawyers in the family, Hill discovered she “had a knack for debate” as a freshman at H.M. King High School.
“The class was taught by Janie Casteneda, who also served as the [Texas A&I University] debate coach,” she said. “Ms. Casteneda inspired many of us in that small town to pursue careers in law — including my exceptionally talented debate partner, Elsa Alcala. It was through debate that I realized I might want to become an attorney. I was drawn to the intellectual challenge of examining issues from multiple perspectives and the art of persuasion, especially when trying to connect with someone who sees the world differently.”
Hill followed in her parents’ footsteps by going to college at Texas A&I University — by then renamed Texas A&M-Kingsville — where she earned a degree in business administration.
Hill went to work at Christus Spohn Health System — “That’s where I developed a deep appreciation for the healthcare environment” — because there were no law schools at the time in South Texas. But the family later moved to Austin, where she earned her degree from the University of Texas School of Law in 2004. After graduation, she joined Cox Smith Matthews — which is now Dykema Gossett — as an associate in San Antonio.
“While working at Dykema, I discovered a passion for healthcare law and was thrilled to receive an offer to join the firm. That opportunity brought us back to San Antonio, where my legal career truly began,” she said.
Hill’s mentor at Cox Smith, David Butler, transitioned to an in-house role with one of his clients, Community Hospital Corporation. In May 2006, Butler invited Hill to join CHC as associate counsel.
“I accepted, excited to return to the hospital setting I found so rewarding,” she said.
Hill spent seven years at CHC and then became the general counsel at Shannon Medical Center in San Angelo.
In 2018, Hill joined Visionworks of America, where she now serves as the GC of VSP’s owned eyecare division, which encompasses over 1,300 optical retail locations across 42 states, including well-known brands like Visionworks and Eyemart Express.
“Healthcare regulatory law is a dynamic and rewarding field,” she said. “A central focus of my role involves creating strategic partnerships with optometrists — whether through practice acquisitions or the development of management agreements — to support collaborative growth with our brands.”
Hill also oversees the implementation and compliance with industry regulations, including those governing optometry, opticianry, telehealth and both state and federal consumer and patient privacy laws. She also manages many of the company’s litigation matters.
The work is intellectually engaging and constantly evolving, which is part of what makes it fulfilling.
“Lisa sees the big picture and is thoughtful and practical on how to approach issues and reach solid, defensible decisions,” said Harkins.
Harkins said one of Hill’s biggest successes came in 2019 when she helped to “gracefully assist the company and its leadership as the company changed ownership from private equity to join the VSP Global team.”
“As you can imagine, the transition from a company that was owned and operated by a private equity firm to a global healthcare company like VSP Global could be somewhat daunting,” he said. “Lisa was able to guide and oversee the merger of the Visionworks legal team into the broader VSP Global legal team with grace and confidence.”
Texas House Bill 1696
The eyecare communication legislation came across the desk of Hill and Fields in the spring of 2023.
The Texas House Bill created a legal and strategic dilemma for VSP.
“On one hand, the company was committed to being a responsible corporate citizen and maintaining strong relationships across the political spectrum, particularly in Texas — the home state of Visionworks and important market for VSP,” Hill said. “On the other hand, VSP believed HB 1696 would significantly harm consumers by preventing them from learning which providers offered greater savings through their vision plans. Faced with this conflict, VSP had to carefully weigh its options, ultimately leading to its involvement in litigation to challenge the law.”
Fields and Hill discovered that other stakeholders — the nonprofit Healthy Vision Association and the National Association of Vision Care Plans (NAVCP) — expressed interest in joining the legal challenge.
The VSP legal team agreed to coordinate the joint defense effort. VSP was represented by constitutional experts from Baker Botts and Dykema. Morgan Lewis and Phelps were counsel for HVA and NAVCP, respectively.
“Given Lisa Fields’ strong litigation background, she was appointed to lead weekly status briefings for the now-large plaintiff counsel team,” Hill said. “Her role was pivotal in ensuring alignment across firms and maintaining momentum. One of the most critical responsibilities for in-house counsel during litigation is to translate complex legal strategy and developments into actionable insights for our internal stakeholders — enabling informed governance.”
Fields kept the executive team of VSP’s parent company and its board of directors apprised of the case’s progress and strategic implications. Hill kept the leadership of VSP’s healthcare companies informed about the status of the litigation and its potential operational impacts.
“With so many big law firms and prominent lawyers who could have had big egos, it could have been an issue, but there was none of it,” Fields said. “The legal team was nimble and worked very well together.”
Hill agreed, noting that Visionworks had worked with Dykema lawyers before, though not this specific group of lawyers. She said they selected Dykema to lead the filing of the lawsuit “based on the firm’s prompt and thorough analysis of the legal merits of our case, as well as their thoughtful approach to litigation strategy.”
“We were particularly impressed by their openness and professionalism,” she said. “Dykema did not hesitate to support VSP’s decision to engage multiple firms to represent different divisions of the company and to invite participation from counsel representing other plaintiffs. Their collaborative spirit and ability to work seamlessly with powerhouse firms like Baker Botts, Morgan Lewis and Phelps were instrumental in building a unified and effective legal team. Dykema’s leadership and collegiality helped position VSP for a strong result in a complex and high-stakes legal matter.”
Hill and Fields worked with the outside lawyers to shape the litigation strategy, including the decision to file the lawsuit in federal court in Lubbock.
Hill also focused on identifying a Visionworks customer and a physician who would be negatively impacted and recruited them as co-plaintiffs for the litigation.
“We wanted a variety of plaintiffs in case there was an issue of standing,” Fields said.
In the spring of 2024, Senior U.S. District Judge Sam Cummings granted VSP’s request for a preliminary injunction and rejected the state’s argument of sovereign immunity for Abbott, Paxton and Brown.
The state immediately filed an appeal to the Fifth Circuit.
In preparation for the oral argument, the legal team conducted four moot arguments, including the day before the actual arguments in New Orleans.
“We mooted this case more than any case I have ever handled,” Kratovil said. “Aaron and the other lawyers beat me up pretty good in preparation.”
Kratovil was referring to Baker Botts appellate partner Aaron Streett. After the mock argument, Kratovil and the team took Fields to Galatoire’s on Bourbon Street for her first dinner in New Orleans.
The oral argument was Nov. 6, the day after the presidential election.
“I was so impressed with how well-prepared Chris was for the arguments,” said Fields, who attended the hearing and sat near the back of the courtroom. “Chris knocked it out of the park. I left the courtroom that day very confident.”
Then came midafternoon on May 23, when Kratovil received the email from the Fifth Circuit clerk.
“Unlike district courts and trial courts, where you are called into court to hear the verdict announced, federal court appellate rulings come like a thunderbolt out of nowhere and with no warning,” Kratovil said. “It is terrifying and invigorating how we get appellate court decisions.”
Kratovil said he opened the Fifth Circuit email, clicked on the attachment and saw the 29-page unanimous opinion.
“I immediately scrolled to the last paragraph, which is the money paragraph, to see if the lower court had been affirmed or reversed,” he said.
Then he read the full decision, written by Judge Stephen Higginson.
“The First Amendments directs us to be especially skeptical of regulations that seek to keep people in the dark for what the government perceives to be their own good,” Judge Higginson wrote, citing a Supreme Court decision from 1996.
“Because the defendants have not explained why H.B. 1696’s limitations on speech directly advance the governmental interests they have asserted in a manner no more extensive than necessary, we conclude that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their commercial speech claim,” the judge wrote.
Hill said those six words — “the plaintiffs are likely to succeed” — jumped out at her.
“There have been no celebrations or victories parties yet,” Hill said. “The case is not over.”
The case has been sent back to the federal district court where motions for summary judgment are pending.
The Fifth Circuit upholding the injunction on implementation of the law is not the last word. Both the state of Texas and the Texas Optometric Association, which intervened in the case, have filed motions for summary judgment.
“We continue to navigate the complexities of this important legal battle,” Hill said.
The case is Healthy Vision Association v. Greg Abbott, Fifth Circuit case No. 24-10245.