Insurance Law

GMSR has a long history of representing insurance carriers on a wide range of issues, including first- and third-party coverage, excess insurance, contribution and allocation claims, as well as bad faith liability issues, such as Brandt fee questions and punitive damages.  GMSR’s appellate lawyers regularly use this experience to assist clients in all facets of the appellate process.  The firm also counsels both carriers and policyholders regarding their potential liabilities and rights.

The Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Of Covid-Related Insurance Coverage Suit Against GMSR’s Client Based On Policy’s Exclusions

A California-based healthcare facility operator sued its insurance carrier after the carrier denied coverage for the facility’s alleged Covid-19-related losses.  Like dozens of other unsuccessful Covid-19-era lawsuits against insurance carriers, it alleged “direct physical loss of or damage” to its property from the presence of

Mar 14, 2022 Robert A. Olson
GMSR’s Bob Olson & Ellie Ruth To Present “A YEAR IN REVIEW” – Case Highlights of 2021

This Thursday, March 17, GMSR appellate attorneys Bob Olson and Ellie Ruth will present IN PERSON at the Association of Southern California Defense Counsel’s 61st Annual Seminar: “A Year in Review” — Case Highlights of 2021 In their 90-minute presentation, Bob and Ellie will identify

Oakes v. Progressive Transportation Services, Inc. (2021) 71 Cal.App.5th 486

Following a fender-bender, plaintiff was treated for minor injuries covered by workers’ compensation insurance.  Plaintiff nevertheless sued the other driver’s employer (GMSR’s client) for millions of dollars, and rejected a Code of Civil Procedure section 998 settlement offer.  The jury awarded plaintiff less than the

Court of Appeal Affirms Judgment For GMSR Client, Making New Law On The Interplay Of Two Statutes

Following a fender-bender, plaintiff was treated for minor injuries covered by workers’ compensation insurance.  Plaintiff nevertheless sued the other driver’s employer (GMSR’s client) for millions of dollars, and rejected a Code of Civil Procedure section 998 settlement offer.  The jury awarded plaintiff less than the

Ray v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. (9th Cir. Oct. 21, 2021, No. 20-55989) 2021 WL 4902357

Plaintiffs injured in a car accident obtained an assignment of the at-fault driver’s rights and sued the driver’s insurance carrier for bad faith.  They alleged that they had sent the carrier a settlement demand letter, but the carrier failed to timely accept.  The carrier moved

Ninth Circuit Affirms Judgment, Rejecting Plaintiffs’ Belated Effort To Change Insurance Bad Faith Theories

Plaintiffs injured in a car accident obtained an assignment of the at-fault driver’s rights and sued the driver’s insurance carrier for bad faith.  They alleged that they had sent the carrier a settlement demand letter, but the carrier failed to timely accept.  The carrier moved

Carachure v. Scott (2021) 70 Cal.App.5th 16

A plaintiff was seriously injured in an auto accident. Her counsel demanded that the defendant and the defendant’s insurance carrier settle the plaintiff’s injury claim by paying the full $15,000 policy limit. The carrier accepted and complied with all the demand’s short-fuse conditions, thereby dashing

Court Of Appeal Rejects Plaintiff’s Attempt To Disavow $15,000 Settlement So As To Pursue A Multi-million-dollar Claim

A plaintiff was seriously injured in an auto accident. Her counsel demanded that the defendant and the defendant’s insurance carrier settle the plaintiff’s injury claim by paying the full $15,000 policy limit. The carrier accepted and complied with all the demand’s short-fuse conditions, thereby dashing

Court Of Appeal Rejects Insureds’ Cumis Claims And Affirms Judgment For Insurer

Plaintiff insureds owned a residential property where a squatter died in during a fire. The insureds tendered the defense of the ensuing lawsuit to their insurance carrier, which hired counsel to defend the insureds. Purportedly dissatisfied with appointed counsel’s performance, the insureds demanded independent “Cumis”

Nede Mgmt., Inc. v. Aspen American Ins. Co. (2021) 68 Cal.App.5th 1121

Plaintiff insureds owned a residential property where a squatter died in during a fire. The insureds tendered the defense of the ensuing lawsuit to their insurance carrier, which hired counsel to defend the insureds. Purportedly dissatisfied with appointed counsel’s performance, the insureds demanded independent “Cumis”

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
COMMUNITY PRO BONO

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.

Read More