Trials

In re Testosterone Replacement Therapy Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2545 (N.D. Ill.)
Representing AbbVie, AbbVie Products LLC, and Abbott Laboratories in AndroGel^® multidistrict litigation (MDL) concerning allegations of injuries as a result of taking prescription testosterone replacement therapy drugs. In 2017 and 2018, Kirkland prevailed when the court vacated the jury verdicts in the first and second bellwether trials. In 2018, Kirkland and co-counsel achieved complete defense verdicts in the third, fourth and fifth bellwether jury trials. Additional bellwether cases are stayed pending the negotiation and court approval of a potential global settlement.

Tronox Worldwide LLC v. Anadarko Petroleum and Kerr-Mcgee (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.)
Represented Tronox, Inc. in challenges to Kerr-McGee Corporation's spin-off of Tronox in 2005 as a fraudulent transfer. Obtained a significant summary judgment ruling on damages in 2012 and achieved a winning bench verdict in 2013. The case ultimately settled in 2014 for an historic $5.15 billion, which at the time represented the largest payment for cleanup of environmental contamination in U.S. history.

State of Florida v. State of Georgia (U.S.)
Representing the State of Georgia in an original jurisdiction action alleging that Georgia’s use of water from the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin hurts Florida’s wildlife and economy further downstream. In 2017, following a five-week trial before an appointed Special Master, Kirkland prevailed when the Special Master recommended a denial of Florida’s request for relief. In 2018, following oral argument on exceptions to the Special Master Report, a divided Supreme Court opinion remanded the case back to the Special Master for further proceedings. The case remains ongoing.

Jelinek v. Abbott Laboratories (Ohio Ct. Comm. Pl.)
Defended Abbott Laboratories in an age discrimination suit believed to be one of the longest running cases in Ohio. The first trial (which took place before Kirkland’s involvement) resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff of more than $26 million; the second and third were mistrials; and the fourth resulted in a victory for Abbott, though certain unfavorable evidence was excluded and the verdict was subsequently vacated. In 2017, despite the plaintiff being permitted to introduce the previously excluded evidence, the fifth trial concluded in a unanimous verdict for Abbott after just an hour of jury deliberations.

The Coalition for Equity and Excellence in Maryland Higher Education, Inc., et al. v. Maryland Higher Education Commission, et al. (D. Md.; 4th Cir.)
Representing, on a pro bono basis with the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a coalition of students and alumni from Maryland’s four public Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) in its lawsuit against the state for failure to dismantle the remnants of its former segregated higher education system. In 2013, following a six-week bench trial, Kirkland achieved a landmark victory when the court ruled that Maryland had violated the constitutional rights of students at Maryland’s HBCUs by unnecessarily duplicating their programs at nearby traditionally white institutions (TWIs). In 2017, following a six-week remedies trial, the court issued a groundbreaking remedial order in favor of Kirkland’s client. The court denied Maryland’s Daubert motion to exclude plaintiffs’ experts, and accepted the plaintiffs’ argument that the proper remedy should focus on the creation of unique, high-demand academic programs at HBCUs, along with funding for not only the programs, but also scholarships, marketing, financial aid and, where appropriate, facilities. The court also appointed a special master (at the state’s expense) to oversee the placement of these academic programs and related funding at Maryland’s HBCUs for a 10-year period, as Kirkland had urged. In doing so, the court permanently enjoined the state from unnecessarily duplicating HBCU programs at TWIs.

Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC v. Willowood, LLC, et al. (M.D.N.C.; Fed. Cir.)
Represented Syngenta in litigation against Willowood alleging patent infringement with respect to patents covering Syngenta’s azoxystrobin fungicide and processes to make it. In 2017, the court granted summary judgment in favor of Syngenta, finding three of the four patents-in-suit valid and finding infringement with respect to two of the four patents. The court also agreed with Syngenta that, with respect to one of the process patents, the standards for shifting the burden of proof on infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 295 had been met. In September 2017, a jury found that Willowood infringed that process patent and awarded Syngenta nearly $1 million in damages. In November 2017, the court granted Syngenta’s motion for a permanent injunction against Willowood, and denied Willowood’s motion to sell certain products it had imported but not yet sold prior to the jury verdict. Appeals are pending in the Federal Circuit.