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.

567 Case Results
Filter

Begley v. Delta Dental of California (Aug. 31, 2021, A159983) 2021 WL 3878844 [nonpublished opinion]

Delta Dental laid off 33 employees as part of a reorganization. One sued, alleging pregnancy discrimination and retaliation. The trial court granted summary judgment for Delta, and GMSR secured an affirmance on appeal. Agreeing with GMSR’s position, the Court of Appeal held that Delta established

Ferra v. Gilmore (Aug. 20, 2021, B303592) 2021 WL 3700420 [nonpublished opinion]

Maria Ferra paid $1.6 million that she did not believe was owed, to stop a deed-of-trust holder from foreclosing on property Maria had sold to a third party under an indemnity and security agreement.  Maria then sued the deed-of-trust holder to recover the wrongfully-demanded money. 

Meridian Financial Services, Inc. v. Phan (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 657

A rogue employee of a title company promoted a Ponzi scheme in which she obtained investments from the appellant, a real estate entrepreneur whom she knew from handling his escrow business. When the scheme collapsed and the appellant purportedly lost about $9 million, he sued

Johnson v. Williams (July 7, 2021, C088920) 2021 WL 2819851 [nonpublished opinion]

GMSR’s client admitted negligence arising out of a low speed rear-end collision, but denied that plaintiffs suffered any resulting damages.  The Court of Appeal affirmed the jury’s judgment of no damages, and rejected the claim that the trial court abused its discretion by allowing questions

Jean-Louis v. City of Riverside (9th Cir., June 15, 2021, No. 19-55175) __Fed.Appx.__, 2021 WL 2433615

Louis Jean-Louis sued the City of Riverside, City officials, and City employees, alleging a scheme to place houses into receivership by levying excessive fines for violating City ordinances. The district court dismissed Jean-Louis’ suit on res judicata grounds, because Jean-Louis had previously settled and dismissed

In re Castlepoint National Ins. Co. (June 15, 2021, A158646) __Cal.App.5th__ [2021 WL 2431011]

A group of New York investment companies turned to GMSR when a California trial court—citing agreements and injunctions in a prior insurance company liquidation—barred most of their $200 million New York lawsuit from proceeding. Facing off against both the California Insurance Commissioner and the New

The Claremont Colleges, Inc. v. Southern Cal. School of Theology (June 4, 2021, B301897, B304065) 2021 WL 2283010 [nonpublished opinion]

GMSR’s clients, the Claremont Colleges, sought enforcement of the buy-back terms in a 1957 land sale agreement with the Claremont School of Theology (CST). In the 1957 agreement, CST promised that the land would be used for educational purposes only, and if CST ever wanted

Southern Cal. School of Theology v. Claremont Graduate University (May 3, 2021, B302452) 2021 WL1731232 [nonpublished opinion]

This was the second appeal arising from efforts by GMSR’s client, the Claremont Colleges, to enforce the buy-back terms of a 1957 land sale agreement with the Claremont School of Theology (CST). (See first appeal.) Although the Colleges prevailed overall, CST recovered fees for an

MAG Aerospace Industries v. Precise Aerospace Manufacturing (9th Cir., April 26, 2021, No. 19-55932) __ Fed.Appx. __ [2021 WL 1997955]

GMSR represents Precise Aerospace Manufacturing, Inc., a company that makes plastic parts from specialized molds owned by plaintiff MAG Aerospace Industries, LLC. MAG sued Precise for not delivering parts and molds on time and, after a bench trial, recovered $1.3 million it incurred in efforts

Melamed v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (March 22, 2021, B292794) 2021 WL 1084783 [nonpublished opinion]

A physician brought administrative mandamus proceedings seeking to overturn a medical peer review determination that upheld the summary suspension of his medical staff privileges.  His mandamus arguments, however, challenged a different decision than what the parties had agreed the peer review hearing committee would decide—the