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.
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
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
Plaintiff’s attorney in this asbestos case presented a declaration just before plaintiff’s death, purporting to identify the manufacturers of products he was exposed to decades earlier. Plaintiff signed the document the day before he died. The Ninth Circuit held that the document did not fit
In a published opinion, the Second District Court of Appeal has granted GMSR’s petition for a writ of mandate on behalf of the County of Los Angeles and its Health Officers. The Court reversed a superior court injunction barring the County from enforcing a Covid-19
GMSR convinced the Court of Appeal to reverse a $15 million punitive damages award against GMSR’s client in a case involving alleged exposure to asbestos-cement pipe. The Court of Appeal rejected plaintiffs’ argument that there was an exception to the “officer, director, or managing agent”
In 1957, GMSR’s clients, the Claremont Colleges, sold campus land to the Claremont School of Theology (CST). CST agreed that if it ever wanted to sell the land or ceased using it, the Colleges could buy it back for the original sale price, plus some
Tata Consultancy Services, a global IT company headquartered in India, went to trial in 2018 against a class of plaintiffs claiming discriminatory termination. The plaintiffs said the company had a “pattern or practice” of intentionally discriminating against non-South Asian workers due to their race or
Plaintiff sued his public entity employer for disability discrimination and failure to participate in the interactive process after the employer determined that plaintiff could not perform the essential functions of his job in light of doctor-imposed restrictions on his movement. The Court of Appeal affirmed
A construction worker was electrocuted when his crewmember moved the aerial lift basket he was riding in close to a 60-foot power line owned by GMSR’s client, Southern California Edison. The construction worker sued, alleging that Edison had negligently failed to remove or de-energize the
On the heels of a Ninth Circuit victory relating to the same events, the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of a student’s discrimination claim for failure to comply with the Government Claims Act. Deciding an issue of first impression, the Second District
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.