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.

56 Case Results
Filter

Picazzo v. C.W. Driver, Inc. (Feb. 28, 2020, B289070) [nonpub. opn.].

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

Endurance American Specialty Insurance Company v. Bennington Group, LLC (Jan. 31, 2020, B285909) [nonpub. opn.].

In a unanimous unpublished opinion, the Second Appellate District, Division Five has affirmed a summary judgment in favor of GMSR’s carrier client on the ground that a misrepresentation in the insurance application entitled the insurer to rescind the insurance policy. Rescission allows the carrier to

United Farmers Agents Association, Inc. v. Farmers Group, Inc. (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 478

An insurance agent trade association sued seeking a declaration that GMSR’s insurance company client can only discipline or terminate its agents for cause (which did not include how the agency was operated) and asserted that the governing Agency Appointment Agreements were unconscionable in allowing either

Yu v. Liberty Surplus Ins. Corp. (2018) 30 Cal.App.5th 102

Plaintiff sued a general contractor for defective construction work at the Anaheim hotel she owned; the general contractor cross-complained against a group of subcontractors.  After settling with the general contractor, plaintiff substituted in as the real party in interest on the general contractor’s cross-complaint and

Nat’l Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford v. Great American Ins. Company (March 1, 2017, B264238) [2017 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1453]

Hundreds of diners developed hepatitis, and several died, after consuming tainted green onions.  Two insurers of a company in the distribution chain agreed to transfer control of (at least) that company’s defense to the insurer with greater policy limits.  Years later, a jury found that

21st Century Insurance Co. v. Superior Court (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 322

Plaintiff was injured in an auto accident. He sued the insured. The carrier, GMSR’s client, defended under a $100,000 limits policy. The plaintiff and the insured claimed that two other policies with $25,000 limits each also provided coverage. The plaintiff refused the carrier’s offer of

Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Superior Court (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 1199

Court of Appeal holds that motor vehicle exclusion in a homeowners insurance policy applies to negligent supervision of a child killed by the family vehicle

Adamo v. Fire Insurance Exchange (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 1286

Court of Appeal affirms judgment for GMSR’s insurance carrier client in a coverage dispute involving “other structures.”

Truck Insurance Exchange v. Superior Court, 2013 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 5487

GMSR obtains writ of mandate preventing disclosure of attorney-client privileged documents and communications

Brown v. Mid-Century Insurance Co. (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 841

Court of Appeal affirms summary judgment for GMSR’s client, rejecting insurance coverage of slow, continuous water leak