Business litigants turn to GMSR when the stakes are high, whether it’s to preserve an important victory or to challenge an adverse decision. GMSR has substantive experience in a range of fields including antitrust, bankruptcy, banking/lender liability, contract interpretation and enforcement, torts, trade secrets misappropriation, and unfair competition. That experience, combined with GMSR’s outside-the-box thinking and persuasive writing, ensures appellate briefs that present its clients’ case in the strongest light possible. Savvy clients also regularly bring GMSR in long before the appellate stage to draft dispositive motions, review proposed jury instructions and verdict forms, and advise on strategy with an eye toward appeal.
Batchelder v. Kawamoto (1998) 147 F.3d 915
Standing to bring derivative action of holder of American Depository Receipts of Japanese corporation; choice of law
Mattco Forge, Inc. v. Arthur Young & Co. (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 820
Nature of proof required for malpractice case-within-a-case; appropriate jury instruction defining clear and convincing evidence””
Jessen Elec. & Service Co. v. General Telephone Co. of California (9th Cir. 1997) 106 F.3d 407 [unpublished disposition]
Contract for perpetual discount on yellow pages advertising; contractual attorney’s fees on disavowed contract
Roddenberry v. Roddenberry (1996) 44 Cal.App.4th 634
Ex-wife of Star Trek creator presented no substantial evidence supporting her claim to proceeds from Star Trek projects
Mungo v. City National Bank (1995, B084558)
Impact of entry of judgment on trial court’s power to reconsider summary judgment; lender liability
Wells Fargo Bank v. Bank of America (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 424
Enforceability of price-indexing clause in 95-year old lease based on novation of lease
Main Line Pictures, Inc. v. Basinger (Sept. 22, 1994, B077509) 1994 WL 814244 [nonpublished opinion]
Judgment reversed because prejudicially ambiguous jury instruction
Farkas v. Lazerson (1994, B070545)
Contract for sale of ophthalmology practice properly cancelled
Rosenfeld, Meyer & Susman v. Cohen & Riordan (1983) 146 Cal.App.3d 200
Partnership dispute arising from breakup of law firm; breaches of fiduciary duties owed by former law partners
Bank of the West v. Superior Court (1992) 2 Cal.4th 1254
Interpretation of “advertising injury” coverage under general liability insurance policy (amicus curiae brief)
Browse By Practice Area
Who We Serve
Whether on appeal, assisting trial counsel, or advising government officials contemplating legislative action, GMSR provides unique insight into the complex laws that impact public entities.
Where coverage may exist, GMSR represents insureds on appeal effectively and efficiently. Where it does not, the firm protects insurers’ right to deny claims.
GMSR offers corporate clients objective assessments on appeal, based on a deep understanding of the limitations and opportunities of appellate review.
The firm’s lawyers are team players, collaborating with trial counsel at any level from legal strategy to writing or editing trial court motions and appellate briefs.
GMSR vigorously advocates the rights of individual plaintiffs and defendants, in both state and federal appellate courts.
As part of GMSR’s long-standing commitment to social justice and equality, GMSR provides pro bono appellate services to individuals and to community organizations on issues of concern.
© 2023 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Los Angeles
6420 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1100
Los Angeles, California 90048
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.