On December 18, 2025, the Supreme Court of Kentucky clarified when internal hospital investigations and reports are protected from discovery under the federal Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act (“PSQIA”) and Kentucky’s peer review privilege statute. Ashley Ward and Harper Anderson take a look at the clarification in this Stites & Harbison Client Alert.

Owners, developers, and lenders take note: moving forward, you will need to scrutinize the inclusion of retainage in your construction contracts. For projects with a contract value of $2 million or more, owners must deposit any amounts held back from progress payments into an escrow account. While a version of this requirement has been on the books for decades, participants in construction projects have generally ignored it. Effective as of June 27, 2025, the Kentucky General Assembly put an end to this practice. Construction attorneys Steven Henderson and JP Stilz take a look at what this means in this Stites & Harbison Client Alert.

Following years of litigation, on December 19, 2025, the Delaware Supreme Court reversed the Delaware Court of Chancery’s 2024 order rescinding a 2018 special incentive compensation award granted by Tesla, Inc. (“Tesla”) to Elon Musk (“Musk”). The grant, which was valued at approximately $56 billion at the time of issuance, is now worth over $100 billion. Brian Cromer takes a look at the case in this Stites & Harbison Client Alert.

In a recent decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, Sierra Club v. EPA, Nos. 23-3581/3583 (6th Cir. Dec. 5, 2025), the Court invoked its statutory interpretation authority to hold that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) contravened the plain language of the Clean Air Act (“CAA”) by redesignating the Detroit area as in attainment with the 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (“NAAQS”). However, the Court deferred to EPA’s technical expertise in determining that certain air emissions could be excluded from consideration of the Detroit area’s compliance with the ozone NAAQS because of their qualification as “exceptional events” under CAA, demonstrating that Courts will continue to defer to agencies’ expertise, but will not defer to agency interpretations of their enabling statutes. Environmental attorneys Jennifer Cave and Jordan Lee take a look at the matter in this Stites & Harbison Client Alert.