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.
Hiraishi v. DeLeon et al. (Mar. 14, 2022, B310395) 2022 WL 761930 [nonpublished opinion]
A high school teacher brought FEHA claims against two school administrators, alleging (1) the principal engaged in gender harassment by granting male teachers work assignments and resources that she would have preferred over her own; and (2) the superintendent failed to investigate plaintiff’s ongoing complaints,
Court of Appeal Affirms Dismissal Of Employment Harassment Suit Against GMSR’s Clients
A high school teacher brought FEHA claims against two school administrators, alleging (1) the principal engaged in gender harassment by granting male teachers work assignments and resources that she would have preferred over her own; and (2) the superintendent failed to investigate plaintiff’s ongoing complaints,
Begley v. Delta Dental of California (Aug. 31, 2021, A159983) 2021 WL 3878844 [nonpublished opinion]
Delta Dental laid off 33 employees as part of a reorganization. One sued, alleging pregnancy discrimination and retaliation. The trial court granted summary judgment for Delta, and GMSR secured an affirmance on appeal. Agreeing with GMSR’s position, the Court of Appeal held that Delta established
Court Affirms Summary Judgment For GMSR’s Client On Employment Discrimination Claims
Delta Dental laid off 33 employees as part of a reorganization. One sued, alleging pregnancy discrimination and retaliation. The trial court granted summary judgment for Delta, and GMSR secured an affirmance on appeal. Agreeing with GMSR’s position, the Court of Appeal held that Delta established
Slaight v. Tata Consultancy Services (9th Cir. 2021) 842 Fed.Appx. 66
Tata Consultancy Services, a global IT company headquartered in India, went to trial in 2018 against a class of plaintiffs claiming discriminatory termination. The plaintiffs said the company had a “pattern or practice” of intentionally discriminating against non-South Asian workers due to their race or
GMSR Wins Ninth Circuit Affirmance In Closely Watched Title VII Class Action
Tata Consultancy Services, a global IT company headquartered in India, went to trial in 2018 against a class of plaintiffs claiming discriminatory termination. The plaintiffs said the company had a “pattern or practice” of intentionally discriminating against non-South Asian workers due to their race or
Lopez v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Dec. 14, 2020, B296598) 2020 WL 7332045 [nonpublished opinion]
Plaintiff sued his public entity employer for disability discrimination and failure to participate in the interactive process after the employer determined that plaintiff could not perform the essential functions of his job in light of doctor-imposed restrictions on his movement. The Court of Appeal affirmed
Shirvanyan v. Los Angeles Community College Dist. (2020) 59 Cal.App.5th 82
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
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.
© 2022 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.