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.
Himelsein Mandel Fund Management, LLC et al. v. Fortress Investment Group, LLC et al. (Cal. Ct. App., Mar. 28, 2019, No. B281210) 2019 WL 1395963.
GMSR’s clients sued their lender for destroying their business by reneging on a promise to provide additional funding. The lender cross-complained for an alleged $113 million deficiency following foreclosure on the security for its loans. The trial court rejected the clients’ demand for a jury.
Pryor et al. v. Fitness International, LLC (Jan. 3, 2019, No. B287329) [2019 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 48]
An employee of GMSR’s client, a health club, took heroin during his work-shift. Finding him no longer fit to perform his job, the health club’s manager ordered him to leave the premises. The intoxicated employee then drove away from the club striking and mortally injuring
Sullivan v. Southern California Edison Company (July 12, 2018, D073454) [2018 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 4723]
A car crashed into the back of a laundromat, damaging the building’s structure and electrical panel. GMSR’s client, Southern California Edison, sent a representative to inspect the panel and he decided to leave the electrical power turned on. The next day, while repairing structural damage,
Newland v. County of Los Angeles (2018) 24 Cal.App.5th 676
Plaintiff was injured in a car accident with a Los Angeles County deputy public defender who was on his way home from work. Although employers are generally not liable for accidents arising from an employee’s commute, the plaintiff sued GMSR’s client, the County, contending it
Colyear v. Rolling Hills Community Assn. of Rancho Palos Verdes (Apr. 23, 2018, B279198) [2018 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 2724]
The client owns property in Rolling Hills, a community subject to a patchwork of covenants, conditions, and restrictions. The defendants—the community’s homeowners association and several of its board members—took the position that a tree-trimming covenant applied to every property in the community, including the client’s.
Wilson v. Southern California Edison Co. (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 786
The plaintiff sued GMSR’s client, Southern California Edison, after renovations to her bathroom caused her to feel a slight tingle of electricity when she touched her showerhead, caused by neutral-to-earth voltage from a nearby Edison substation. She won a $4 million jury verdict on multiple
Eleanor Licensing LLC v. Classic Recreations LLC (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 599
The clients had licensed their rights to produce replicas of Eleanor, the car that played a starring role in Gone in 60 Seconds, to the defendants. In return for the license, the defendants gave the clients, among other things, the first licensed replica they built.
Martinez v. Decurion Corp. (Dec. 1, 2017, B270616) [2017 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 8209]
Martinez v. The Decurion Corp. (unpublished, 2d Civ. B270616): A moviegoer tripped over a bench after being evacuated from a movie theater whose fire alarm was triggered by burnt popcorn. The moviegoer sued the theater, GMSR’s client, for negligence. She asserted several negligence theories, including
CRST, Inc. v. Superior Court (2017) 11 Cal.App.5th 1255
A truck driver allegedly caused an accident. Unbeknownst to his employer, he had a significant pre-employment history of alcohol and drug abuse and vehicle accidents. This was not discovered by a third-party which handled pre-employment screenings. The driver also had some minor accidents and speeding
Grant v. Foster Wheeler, LLC (Me. 2016) 140 A.3d 1242
Announcing new law in Maine, the court affirmed summary judgment for GMSR’s client Warren Pumps, LLC, and other manufacturers on whose behalf we briefed the key issues. Maine’s highest court set three proof standards, rejecting attempts to evade summary judgment with less precise evidence. First,
© 2019 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
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 500
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.