Healthcare Law

GMSR represents insurers, hospitals, physicians, and other healthcare providers in the full range of claims facing them. Issues that GMSR’s appellate lawyers have successfully handled on appeal include claims of malpractice, elder abuse, termination of physician staff privileges, and healthcare service plan regulation.

Topete v. Sutter Health Sacramento Sierra Region (unpublished, 3rd Civ. C074716)

Plaintiff brought a medical malpractice action against GMSR’s client, Sutter Health Sacramento Sierra Region, and several individual physicians.  She sought to hold Sutter Health liable for negligent hiring or retention of a physician.  The court of appeal affirmed summary judgment for Sutter Health.  It held

Court of Appeal affirms summary judgment in favor of GMSR’s client in medical malpractice case.

Topete v. Sutter Health Sacramento Sierra Region (unpublished, 3rd Civ. C074716):  Plaintiff brought a medical malpractice action against GMSR’s client, Sutter Health Sacramento Sierra Region, and several individual physicians.  She sought to hold Sutter Health liable for negligent hiring or retention of one of the

Sperber v. Regents of the University of Cal., 2014 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 8117

GMSR’s clients, the Regents and several of its doctors, obtained summary judgment in a medical negligence action with expert declarations that everything they did was within the standard of care and nothing they did caused the decedent’s death. The only declaration plaintiff submitted in opposition

Court of Appeal affirms defense summary judgment in medical malpractice case

Rebecca Sperber v. The Regents of the University of California (2014) 2014 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 8117 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Three) [unpublished]. GMSR’s clients, the Regents and several of its doctors, obtained summary judgment in a medical negligence action with expert

Camargo v. John F. Kennedy Memorial Hospital, 2014 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 5946

In a wrongful death action arising from care of a patient suffering from a devastating case of flesh-eating bacteria, the trial court entered judgment for more than $4,699,000 against a hospital and other defendants.  Representing the hospital on appeal, Mr. Poster obtained a reversal with

Camargo v. John F. Kennedy Mem. Hosp., 2014 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 5946

A jury found that in the care of a patient who was suffering from flesh-eating bacteria and later died, JFK Memorial Hospital was negligent, that a JFK nurse had committed “willful misconduct,” and that JFK was responsible for 70% of the resulting harm. The jury

Court of Appeal slashes $4.7 million medical malpractice judgment against GMSR’s hospital client

Camargo v. John F. Kennedy Memorial Hospital, Inc. (2014) 2014 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 5946 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three) [unpublished]. A jury found that in the care of a patient who was suffering from flesh-eating bacteria and later died, JFK Memorial

Doctors Co. v. Sherman Oaks Hospital, 2013 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 7816

“GMSR’s client, a hospital, and three doctors all settled with the claimants. One doctor obtained a good faith settlement determination. The two remaining doctors sought equitable indemnity from the hospital. A jury apportioned the majority of fault to the doctor with a good faith settlement.

Court of Appeal holds that in indemnity action settlements must be allocated to economic loss in same ratio as overall recovery

Doctors Company v. Sherman Oaks Hospital (2013) 2013 Cal.App. Unpub. Lexis 7816 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Eight) [unpublished]. GMSR’s client, a hospital, and three doctors all settled with the claimants. One doctor obtained a good faith settlement determination. The two remaining

Wachtel v. Regents of the University of Cal., 2011 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 8410

“The Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment in favor of GMSR’s client, The Regents of the University of California, and multiple other medical defendants after the trial court sustained a demurrer without leave to amend on the plaintiffs’ sixth attempt to amend their complaint to

Who We Serve

PUBLIC ENTITIES

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.

Read More
INSURERS

Where coverage may exist, GMSR represents insureds on appeal effectively and efficiently. Where it does not, the firm protects insurers’ right to deny claims.

Read More
BUSINESSES

GMSR offers corporate clients objective assessments on appeal, based on a deep understanding of the limitations and opportunities of appellate review.

Read More
TRIAL COUNSEL

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.

Read More
INDIVIDUALS

GMSR vigorously advocates the rights of individual plaintiffs and defendants, in both state and federal appellate courts.

Read More