.svg?rev=0123a45359b34a45b72f615f84c63d11&hash=D9D267D4F8A003D6A105C987E125D147){kind=logo}
Blog Post
On August 3, 2026, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in the closely watched Gilead Tenofovir Cases, No. S283862, --- Cal.5th ---, 2026 WL 2223748 (Cal. Aug. 3, 2026), rejecting the so-called “duty to innovate.” The court held, in a 6-1 decision, that “a drug manufacturer has no duty of care when deciding whether and when to develop and commercialize an allegedly safer alternative drug” to replace an admittedly nondefective drug. The decision is a significant victory for pharmaceutical manufacturers and carries substantial implications for product liability litigation across industries.
The material contained in this communication is informational, general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. The material contained in this communication should not be relied upon or used without consulting a lawyer to consider your specific circumstances. This communication was published on the date specified and may not include any changes in the topics, laws, rules or regulations covered. Receipt of this communication does not establish an attorney-client relationship. In some jurisdictions, this communication may be considered attorney advertising.
