Worldwide: Trials & Appeals & Compensation

The Washington Supreme Court’s recent decision in Polinder v. Brand Insulations, Inc., No. 102782-6 (Wash. Apr. 30, 2026), provides clarifications on how the construction statute of repose applies to contractors in asbestos litigation.

Michael Lowry (Partner-Las Vegas) authored “Are Nevada Procedural Statutes Still Effective in Federal Courts?” appearing in the June 1, 2026, edition of Nevada Lawyer magazine.

A Massachusetts federal court granted summary judgment to Alexion Pharmaceuticals, dismissing Amyndas Pharmaceuticals' Chapter 93A unfair competition claim based on alleged misuse of confidential information during partnership negotiations. The decision rigorously enforces causation requirements and clarifies the boundaries between trade secret protection and legitimate competitive activity in pharmaceutical business development.

This case is the latest in a series of cases — and potentially the first decision by a district court after the Supreme Court’s decision in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P., 603 U.S. 204 (2024) (Purdue) — holding that nonconsensual releases approved in foreign restructuring proceedings can be enforced in the United States under Chapter 15.

In a unanimous decision handed down today, the Supreme Court delivered a tactical victory for Hikma, and a measure of guidance for other generic manufacturers. In Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc., No. 24-889, the Court held that drug manufacturer Amarin, the reference product sponsor, failed to state a claim for active inducement of patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b).

Two federal appellate courts issued significant rulings on class action procedures: the Ninth Circuit addressed intervention rights after settlement of injunctive relief claims, while the D.C. Circuit clarified standing requirements for Rule 23(b)(2) class-wide relief. These decisions provide important guidance on procedural aspects of class action litigation in federal courts.

As recently predicted in our May 8, 2026 blog, a new cert petition was filed on May 22, 2026 in Cantero v. Bank of America, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit, again, the increasingly important question...

In Virginia custody disputes, written communications between parents often become critical evidence that judges review when determining the best interests of the child. Understanding how text messages, emails, and parenting app exchanges can impact your case is essential for parents navigating custody arrangements. This analysis explores practical strategies for maintaining constructive communication that demonstrates cooperation and prioritizes your child's wellbeing throughout the legal process.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court addressed post-settlement challenges in a class action involving alleged violations of the state's security deposit statute and Chapter 93A.