#23-93 Make UC A Good Neighbor v. Regents of University of California, S279242. (A165451; 88 Cal.App.5th 656, mod. 88 Cal.App.5th 1293a; Alameda County Superior Court; RG21110142.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the
#23-92 Williams v. FCA US LLC, S279051. (C091902; 88 Cal.App.5th 765; Butte County Superior Court; 17CV02617.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action. The court ordered briefing deferred pending decision in Niedermeier v. FCA US LLC, S266034
#23-90 Galarsa v. Dolgen California, LLC, S279021. (F082404; 88 Cal.App.5th 639; Kern County Superior Court; BCV-19-102504.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part an order denying a petition to compel arbitration. The court ordered briefing deferred pending
#23-88 In re Tyler C., S279071. (B316341; nonpublished opinion; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 18LJJP00613.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed an order in a juvenile dependency proceeding. The court ordered briefing deferred pending decision in In re Dezi C., S275578 (#22-254),
#23-85 Quintero v. Dolgen California, LLC, S279155. (F083769; nonpublished opinion; Tulare County Superior Court; VCU287566.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed in part and affirmed in part an order denying a petition to compel arbitration. The court ordered briefing deferred pending decision
#23-79 Shusha, Inc. v. Century-National Insurance Company, S278614. (B313907; 87 Cal.App.5th 250; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 20STCV25769.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action. The court ordered briefing deferred pending decision in Another Planet Entertainment, LLC
#23-74 In re X.R., S278928. (B318808; nonpublished opinion; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 20CCJP05092A.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed an order in a juvenile dependency proceeding. The court ordered briefing deferred pending decision in In re Dezi C., S275578 (#22 254),
#23-63 French Laundry Partners, LP v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, S278492. (9th Circ. No. 21-15927; 58 F.4th 1305; Northern District of California; D.C. No. 3:20-cv-04540-JSC.) Request under California Rules of Court, rule 8.548, that this court decide questions of California law presented in a matter
#23-58 John’s Grill, Inc. v. The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., S278481. (A162709; 86 Cal.App.5th 1195; San Francisco County Superior Court; CGC20584184.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part the judgment in a civil action. This case
#23-52 In re Athena R., S278121. (B318751; nonpublished opinion; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 19CCJP05249.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed an order in a juvenile dependency proceeding. Petition for review granted; briefing deferred: 3/22/2023 The petitions for review are granted. Further
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.
Where coverage may exist, GMSR represents insureds on appeal effectively and efficiently. Where it does not, the firm protects insurers’ right to deny claims.
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.