#24-23 New England Country Foods, LLC v. Vanlaw Food Products, Inc., S282968. (9th Cir. No. 22-55432; 87 F.3d 1016; Central District of California; D.C. No. 8:21-cv01060-DOC-ADS.) Request under California Rules of Court, rule 8.548, that this court decide a question of California law presented in
#25-110 Town of Apple Valley v. Apple Valley Ranchos Water, S289391. (E078348; 108 Cal.App.5th 62, mod. 108 Cal.App.5th 666c; San Bernardino County Superior Court; CIVDS1600180.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action and remanded for further proceedings.
#25-106 Colon-Perez v. Security Industry Specialists, Inc., S289702. (A168297; 108 Cal.App.5th 403; Alameda County Superior Court; 21CV004546.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed orders in a civil action. The court ordered briefing deferred pending decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, S284498 (#24-98),
#25-92 Pitt v. Metropolitan Tower Life Ins. Co., S289376. (9th Cir. No. 23-55566; 129 F.4th 583; Southern District of California; No. 3:20-cv-00694-RSH-DEB.) Request under California Rules of Court, rule 8.548, that this court decide a question of California law presented in a matter pending in
#25-91 Leeper v. Shipt, Inc., S289305. (B339670; 107 Cal.App.5th 1001; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 24STCV06485.) Review ordered on the court’s own motion after the Court of Appeal reversed an order denying a motion to compel arbitration in a civil action and remanded with directions.
#24-204 Long v. City of Exeter, S286705. (B316324; nonpublished opinion; San Luis Obispo County Superior Court; 17CV0529.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the following issue: If a police department elects to sell
#23-170 Madrigal v. Hyundai Motor America, S280598. (C090463; 90 Cal.App.5th 385; Placer County Superior Court; SCV0038395.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed an order in a civil action. This case presents the following issue: Do Code of Civil Procedure section 998’s cost-shifting
#24-19 Escamilla v. Vannucci, S282866. (A166176; 97 Cal.App.5th 175; Alameda County Superior Court; RG21111193.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed an order granting a special motion to strike in a civil action. This case presents the following issue: What statute of limitations
#25-74 Zavala v. Hyundai Motor America, S289000. (D082940, D082747; 107 Cal.App.5th 458; Riverside County Superior Court; PSC1807879.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action and remanded for further proceedings. The court ordered briefing deferred pending decision in
#25-67 Office of the State Public Defender v. Bonta, S284496. Original proceeding. The court deferred further action pending decision in Taking Offense v. State of California, S270535 (#21-521), which presents the following issue: Did the Court of Appeal err in declaring the provision of the
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.