Procedural issues create many traps for the unwary: Irregularities in trial court proceedings or ambiguous verdicts may require a new trial; failing to raise an objection in the trial court can foreclose appellate review of an issue; a settlement that purports to preserve the right to appeal can moot the appeal. The list goes on and on. GMSR is experienced in spotting procedural defects and navigating nuances that can be dispositive on appeal. For that reason, trial counsel and clients often consult with GMSR’s appellate lawyers as a case progresses, in order to maximize their chances of success in an eventual appeal. GMSR’s appellate lawyers have also gotten appeals dismissed, revived litigation that should not have been dismissed, and successfully developed arguments for affirmance or reversal, all based on procedural issues.
Court of Appeal affirms order adding members of secret partnership to multimillion dollar judgment
GMSR’s client, a commercial landlord, sued an individual tenant for breach of a lease and obtained a multimillion-dollar judgment. The tenant discharged most of the judgment in bankruptcy. But years later, he disclosed the existence of a secret partnership among him and his family members,
8451 Melrose Property, LLC v. Akhtarzad (2026) 121 Cal.App.5th 1258
Court of Appeal affirms order adding members of secret partnership to multimillion dollar judgment
Navigating Post-Judgment Motions: A Guide Through the Thicket (ABTL Report)
Alana Rotter’s article Navigating Post-Judgment Motions: A Guide Through the Thicket summarizes litigants’ options for seeking relief from an adverse verdict through a motion for new trial, judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or vacatur, including when such motions are warranted, the relevant procedural rules, and the
Court of Appeal affirms defense judgment in design defect suit
GMSR’s clients manufactured commercial-grade tables for a large hotel. A hotel guest was injured when a table top unexpectedly detached. He sued GMSR’s clients, claimed design defects, and asked the trial court to instruct the jury regarding the “risk-benefit” defect test, as well as the
Reddy v. Unifactor Corporation et al. (Mar. 23, 2026, B330750) 2026 WL 798833
Court of Appeal affirms defense judgment in design defect suit
GMSR prevents compelled disclosure of privileged documents via writ review
Writ petitions can provide valuable relief when a trial court issues an erroneous order in the middle of litigation. This proved to be the case recently for a GMSR client. During discovery, the client faced an order to produce several documents that it had asserted
People v. Superior Court (Prologis, Inc.)
GMSR prevents compelled disclosure of privileged documents via writ review
Court of Appeal reverses demurrer based on plea of abatement, allowing GMSR’s client’s lawsuit to proceed
The owner of a car dealership sued his former business partner, seeking to collect on a promissory note. The former business partner sought to abate the action under Code of Civil Procedure section 430.10(c), arguing that it involved the same claims and parties as in
Dechant v. Woodcock (Mar. 26, 2025, D085389) 2025 WL 914119
Court of Appeal reverses demurrer based on plea of abatement, allowing GMSR’s client’s lawsuit to proceed
Ninth Circuit dismisses interlocutory appeal challenging partial summary judgment for GMSR’s clients
A 911 caller reported that a man in his apartment complex was acting erratically. City of Oxnard police officers went to the complex, and ultimately used physical force to subdue the man. A County of Los Angeles paramedic then arrived and provided him with emergency
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.
GMSR represents insurers on appeal effectively and efficiently. We also collaborate with our clients and trial counsel on strategy for coverage, contribution and bad faith litigation before appeals begin.
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.
© 2026 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
Orange County
555 Anton Blvd, Suite 150
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
P: (310) 859-7811
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.