24-119 In re Spielbauer on Discipline, S283172. (__State Bar Court __; State Bar Ct. No. 19-O-30700.) Petitions for review after a State Bar Court recommendation of discipline of an attorney. This case presents the following issue: If a victim of attorney misconduct suffers damages recoverable
#22-91 Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Cement and Gypsum Corp. (London Market Insurers), S273179. (B278091; nonpublished opinion; Los Angeles Superior Court; BC249550). Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part the judgment in a civil action. The court
#24-99 Shear Development Co., LLC v. California Coastal Commission, S284378. (B319895; nonpublished opinion; San Luis Obispo County Superior Court; 20CV-0431.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in an action for writ of administrative mandate. This case presents the following issue:
#24-77 Gilead Tenofovir Cases, S283862. (A165558; 98 Cal.App.5th 911, mod. 99 Cal.App.5th 196a; San Francisco County Superior Court; CJC19005043.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal granted in part and denied in part a petition for writ of mandate. This case presents the following
#24-76 Lockton Investment Advisors v. Superior Court, S283963. (B334130; nonpublished opinion; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 22STCV23460.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal denied a petition for writ of mandate. Petition for review granted; briefing deferred: 4/24/2024 Further action in this matter is
#24-75 Lockton Companies, LLC – Pacific Series v. Superior Court, S283932. (B334428; nonpublished opinion; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 23STCV24107.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal denied a petition for writ of mandate. Petition for review granted; briefing deferred: 4/24/2024 Further action in
#24-71 Ventura County Employees’ Retirement Assn. v. Criminal Justice Attorneys Assn. of Ventura County, S283978. (B325277; 98 Cal.App.5th 1119; Santa Barbara County Superior Court; VENCI00546574.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the following
#24-64 Doe v. Marysville Joint Unified School District, S283639. (C095446; 98 Cal.App.5th 95; Yuba County Superior Court; CVPO2100697.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the following issues: (1) Did the plaintiffs’ second voluntary
#21-50 Niedermeier v. FCA US LLC, S266034. (B293960; 56 Cal.App.5th 1052; Los Angeles County Superior Court; BC638010.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal modified and affirmed the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the following issues: (1) Does the statutory restitution
#24-33 Law Foundation of Silicon Valley v. Superior Court, S282950. (H049554; 96 Cal.App.5th 818, mod. 97 Cal.App.5th 462a; Santa Clara County Superior Court; 20CV362347.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal denied a petition for peremptory writ of mandate. City of Gilroy and Law
Whether on appeal, assisting trial counsel, or advising government officials contemplating legislative action, GMSR provides unique insight into the complex laws that impact public entities.
GMSR represents insurers on appeal effectively and efficiently. We also collaborate with our clients and trial counsel on strategy for coverage, contribution and bad faith litigation before appeals begin.
GMSR offers corporate clients objective assessments on appeal, based on a deep understanding of the limitations and opportunities of appellate review.
The firm’s lawyers are team players, collaborating with trial counsel at any level from legal strategy to writing or editing trial court motions and appellate briefs.
GMSR vigorously advocates the rights of individual plaintiffs and defendants, in both state and federal appellate courts.
As part of GMSR’s long-standing commitment to social justice and equality, GMSR provides pro bono appellate services to individuals and to community organizations on issues of concern.
We welcome your inquiry. However, sending us an email does not create an attorney-client relationship. For that reason, you should not send us any kind of confidential information. Until we have agreed to represent you, we cannot be obligated to keep it confidential.