Clients regularly turn to GMSR’s appellate lawyers for help resolving thorny labor and employment issues. The firm has prevailed in the U.S. Supreme Court on a significant issue of workplace privacy and in the California Supreme Court on issues pertaining to non-competition agreements; successfully handled appeals in wage-and-hour class actions, wrongful termination, and discrimination suits; and obtained dismissals of employees’ suits on procedural grounds.
Shirvanyan v. Los Angeles Community College Dist. (Nov. 30, 2020, No. B296593) __Cal.App.5th__ [2020 WL 7706321]
A jury awarded plaintiff, a kitchen worker at a community college, $3.4 million, including $2.775 million in noneconomic damages and over $500,000 in attorneys’ fees, for the failure to accommodate and to engage in the interactive process relating to two physical conditions: carpal tunnel syndrome
GMSR wins reversal for client community college of adverse $3.4 million FEHA judgment
A jury awarded plaintiff, a kitchen worker at a community college, $3.4 million, including $2.775 million in noneconomic damages and over $500,000 in attorneys’ fees, for the failure to accommodate and to engage in the interactive process relating to two physical conditions: carpal tunnel syndrome
What makes a PAGA Penalty? Robert Olson interviewed by Daily Journal, available via SoundCloud
What makes a PAGA Penalty? After hearing argument the California Supreme Court has ordered additional briefing in a case that could reshape the contours of the state’s Private Attorneys General Act. Attorneys involved in the case, Robert Olson (Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland) and Michael
Pryor et al. v. Fitness International, LLC (Jan. 3, 2019, B287329) 2019 WL 92775 [nonpublished opinion]
An employee of GMSR’s client, a health club, took heroin during his work-shift. Finding him no longer fit to perform his job, the health club’s manager ordered him to leave the premises. The intoxicated employee then drove away from the club striking and mortally injuring
Employer owes no duty to the general public to keep drug-addled employee at work through the end of his shift or to prevent him from driving intoxicated after being told to leave the premises.
An employee of GMSR’s client, a health club, took heroin during his work-shift. Finding him no longer fit to perform his job, the health club’s manager ordered him to leave the premises. The intoxicated employee then drove away from the club striking and mortally injuring
Newland v. County of Los Angeles (2018) 24 Cal.App.5th 676
Plaintiff was injured in a car accident with a Los Angeles County deputy public defender who was on his way home from work. Although employers are generally not liable for accidents arising from an employee’s commute, the plaintiff sued GMSR’s client, the County, contending it
Court of Appeal reverses $13.9 million jury award and orders entry of defense judgment for GMSR’s client in employee commuting case
Plaintiff was injured in a car accident with a Los Angeles County deputy public defender who was on his way home from work. Although employers are generally not liable for accidents arising from an employee’s commute, the plaintiff sued GMSR’s client, the County, contending it
Long v. County of Los Angeles, 2012 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 7890
Plaintiff, a former employee of GMSR’s client, County of Los Angeles, sought reimbursement of attorney’s fees he allegedly incurred in assisting in the County’s defense of litigation. The trial court found that he was required to comply with the Claims Act and failed to do
Hill v. Sullivan Automotive Group, 2011 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 3726
Employer’s failure to add hours on wage statement causes no injury
Shah v. County of Los Angeles (9th Cir. 2010) 399 Fed.Appx. 305
The Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in Shah v. County of Los Angeles, et al., affirming a judgment in favor of our client, County of Los Angeles. In addition to affirming dismissal of the plaintiff’s employment discrimination claims, the Ninth Circuit also affirmed the district
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.
© 2021 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Los Angeles
5900 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th floor
Los Angeles, CA 90036
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.