Cases
GMSR has an enviable record of success on appeal. For your convenience, the firm has provided a simple search tool for guests and clients to search that record.
B.Q. v. Dekok (9th Cir. 2020) __ Fed.Appx. __ [2020 WL 6112498]
Plaintiff, a seventh-grade student, claimed that a teacher’s use of inaccurate and negative translations of Sharia law to teach a unit on religion to students violated the Establishment Clause. The district court dismissed the suit, finding that the teacher was entitled to qualified immunity because
Hawkins v. Southern Cal. Edison Co. (October 8, 2020, B295675) 2020 WL ___ [nonpublished opinion]
Plaintiff alleged that she suffered injury from exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) at her apartment building, to which GMSR’s client Southern California Edison provided power. Edison successfully demurred based on directly controlling California Supreme Court authority—San Diego Gas and Electric Company v. Superior Court (Covalt)
Rosenthal v. City of Oakland (August 27, 2020, A156881) 2020 WL 5051440 [nonpublished opinion]
Plaintiff tripped and fell over a defect on a municipal sidewalk next to property owned by GMSR’s client, Street 41, LLC. He sued the City of Oakland and Street 41 for failing to maintain the sidewalk. The trial court granted the City’s and Street 41’s
Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc. (Aug. 3, 2020, No. S256927) ___ Cal.5th ___ [2020 WL 4432623]
Plaintiff had an at-will contract with a non-party to develop a drug based on a certain active ingredient. Defendant Biogen reached its own deal with that non-party to settle patent disputes and to license the same active ingredient—requiring that the at-will contract with Plaintiff be
Hishmeh Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Porterville (June 22, 2020, F074356, F074357, F077323) 2020 WL 3410926
Plaintiffs were struck by a car while crossing a street near an inoperative streetlight. GMSR’s client, Southern California Edison, serviced the streetlight. Plaintiffs sued, alleging that Edison was negligent in allowing the light to be off. On summary judgment, the trial court ruled that Edison
Quincy Jones v. MJJ Productions, Inc. (May 5, 2020, B285986) 2020 WL 2140759 [nonpublished opinion]
Quincy Jones sued MJJ Productions, claiming it owed him money related to three Michael Jackson albums he produced in the 1970s and 1980s. A jury awarded Jones $9.4 million. As co-counsel for MJJ on appeal, GMSR challenged $6.8 million of the award, arguing they were
Moore v. Teed (2020) 48 Cal.App.5th 280
GMSR won a published decision for our tech-executive client, following his win at trial against a deceitful real estate agent. The agent’s appeal conceded liability for misleading our client into a major purchase-renovation deal on false pretenses—but he attacked all the remedies. He said the
Estate of Sun Mi Choi (Mar. 27, 2020, B298467) 2020 WL 1482403 [nonpublished opinion]
Court of Appeal affirms GMSR clients’ appointment as general administrators of a large estate. The probate court had appointed GMSRs’ clients — professional fiduciaries — as special administrators to manage decedent’s businesses after her death. When the special administrators examined the companies’ finances, they discovered
Picazzo v. C.W. Driver, Inc. (Feb. 28, 2020, B289070) 2020 WL 967087 [nonpublished opinion]
GMSR’s client, a workers’ compensation carrier, paid benefits to an injured employee of its insured, a security company. The employee sued others for negligence, including the university where he had been assigned to work for a number of years. The jury found the university at
Calvary Chapel Bible Fellowship v. County of Riverside (9th Cir. 2020) 948 F.3d 1172
In Calvary Chapel Bible Fellowship v. County of Riverside, the Ninth Circuit affirmed judgment for GMSR’s client, the County of Riverside, in a suit asserting that a County zoning ordinance was facially invalid under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) as purportedly disallowing
© 2020 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Los Angeles
5900 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th floor
Los Angeles, CA 90036
p: (310) 859 7811 | f: (310) 276 5261
San Francisco
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
p: (415) 315 1774
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.