The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment rulings against two major law firms in a complex dispute involving insurance coverage and legacy assets, according to an unpublished opinion filed February 2, 2026.
Dentons US L.L.P. and Wilson, Robertson & VanDeventer P.C. appealed district court rulings that granted summary judgment in favor of Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company and partial summary judgment for Stairway Legacy Assets, L.P. The three-judge panel consisting of Circuit Judges Smith, Stewart, and Haynes issued a brief per curiam opinion affirming the lower court's decisions.
The case originated in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas under case number 6:11-CV-201, indicating the underlying litigation began in 2011. The law firms served as intervenors in the case, suggesting they became involved in existing litigation between other parties to protect their interests.
Dentons, one of the world's largest law firms, became involved in the case following its 2015 merger with McKenna, Long & Aldridge LLP. The Fifth Circuit opinion notes that Dentons is "the surviving successor to McKenna" and indicates the court used both firm names "consistent with this timeline" throughout the proceedings.
Wilson, Robertson & VanDeventer P.C., based in Texas, joined Dentons as co-appellants in challenging the district court's rulings. The firm appears to have had involvement in the original 2011 litigation that preceded Dentons' entry into the case.
The opposing parties include Stairway Legacy Assets, L.P., which appears to be an investment entity focused on legacy assets, and Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company, a specialty insurance provider. Both companies successfully defended against the law firms' appeals at the district court level.
While the Fifth Circuit opinion provides limited details about the underlying dispute, the case appears to involve complex questions of legal fees, insurance coverage, or both. The fact that two law firms intervened in existing litigation suggests they had financial interests at stake, possibly related to attorney fee arrangements or malpractice insurance coverage.
The Fifth Circuit's decision to issue an unpublished per curiam opinion indicates the court viewed the legal questions as settled or lacking precedential value. Under Fifth Circuit rules, unpublished opinions are not designated for publication and carry limited precedential weight.
The timeline of the case reflects the complex nature of the underlying litigation. Beginning in 2011 in the Eastern District of Texas, the case continued through Dentons' 2015 merger with McKenna, Long & Aldridge, and ultimately reached the Fifth Circuit for appellate review in 2025.
The Eastern District of Texas, where the case originated, is known for handling complex commercial litigation and has developed expertise in cases involving financial services and insurance disputes. The district's location in the heart of Texas's business corridor makes it a frequent venue for disputes involving major corporations and financial entities.
For Dentons, the affirmance represents an unsuccessful attempt to overturn adverse district court rulings. As one of the world's largest law firms with more than 12,000 lawyers globally, Dentons rarely finds itself as a litigant rather than counsel in major federal court cases.
Wilson, Robertson & VanDeventer, while significantly smaller than Dentons, appears to have been substantially involved in the original 2011 litigation. The firm's decision to pursue the appeal alongside Dentons suggests significant financial interests were at stake.
The case highlights the complex web of relationships that can develop in major commercial litigation, particularly when insurance coverage disputes intersect with attorney fee arrangements. Law firms sometimes find themselves as interested parties in litigation where they initially served only as counsel.
Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company's success in defending the summary judgment reflects the company's position as a sophisticated specialty insurer capable of handling complex coverage disputes. The company specializes in professional liability and other specialty insurance products that often involve legal industry clients.
Stairway Legacy Assets' partial summary judgment victory suggests the company successfully established key factual or legal points in its favor at the district court level. Legacy asset companies typically acquire and manage distressed or complex financial instruments and investments.
The Fifth Circuit's brief affirmance without extensive analysis suggests the appeals court found the district court's reasoning sound and the legal questions presented lacking in merit. The per curiam format indicates unanimous agreement among the three-judge panel.
Looking ahead, the law firms' options are limited following the Fifth Circuit's affirmance. They could potentially seek en banc review by the full Fifth Circuit or petition the Supreme Court for certiorari, though both options face significant procedural hurdles and uncertain prospects for success.
The case serves as a reminder that even major law firms can find themselves on the losing side of complex litigation, particularly when insurance coverage questions and fee arrangements intersect in unexpected ways. The 15-year timeline from initial filing to appellate resolution also demonstrates the potential duration of complex commercial litigation in federal court.