#26-52 Clapp v. Department of Motor Vehicles, S294891. (B343964; nonpublished opinion; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 24STCP00925.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in an action for writ of administrative mandate and remanded with directions. The court ordered briefing deferred pending
#26-51 Yeh v. Twitter, Inc., S295210. (A170843; nonpublished opinion; San Francisco County Superior Court; CGC23605100.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal of a civil action. This case presents the following issue: Does a defendant’s nonconsensual use of a plaintiff’s personally
#26-49 Honchariw v. PMF CA REIT, LLC, S295127. (B337927; 117 Cal.App.5th 827; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 21STCV25191.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part the judgment in a civil action and remanded with directions. This case presents the
#26-48 Barbosa v. Sierra Pacific Orthopaedic Center Medical Group, Inc., S294710. (F088971; nonpublished opinion; Fresno County Superior Court; 23CECG04847.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed an order denying a motion to compel arbitration in a civil action. This case presents the following
#26-45 Gilliland v. City of Pleasanton, S294539. (A170666; 116 Cal.App.5th 138; Alameda County Superior Court; RG18924833.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action and remanded with directions. This case presents the following issue: Does the definition of
#26-44 Environmental Democracy Project v. Rael, Inc., S294668. (A170385; 116 Cal.App.5th 1272; Alameda County Superior Court; 22CV019973.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the following issue: Does the California Organic Food and Farming
#26-33 Sanchez v. Rojas, S294671. (B338298; nonpublished opinion; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 21STCV41948.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the following issue: Should this court overrule or limit its holding in Elden v.
#26-32 Dreher v. Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power, S294899. (B329610; 116 Cal.App.5th 977; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 19STCV07272.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in a civil action. The court limited review to the following issue: Do
#26-31 California Fair Plan Assn. v. Lara, S294806. (B336043; 116 Cal.App.5th 869; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 21STCV38060.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action and remanded with directions. This case presents the following issue: Under Insurance Code
#26-19 Lorenzo v. San Francisco Zen Center, S294565. (A171659; 116 Cal.App.5th 258; San Francisco County Superior Court; CGC22602047.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action. The court limited review to the following issue: Does the ministerial exception
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.