GMSR’s clients have brought us the full gamut of real property issues, including lease disputes, lis pendens, title insurance, escrow and development agreements, and eminent domain. In protecting our clients’ interests on appeal, we have obtained important decisions in these and other areas.
Calvary Chapel Bible Fellowship v. County of Riverside (9th Cir. Feb. 4, 2020, No. 17-56857) ___ F.3d ___ [2020 WL 547372].
In Calvary Chapel Bible Fellowship v. County of Riverside, the Ninth Circuit affirmed judgment for GMSR’s client, the County of Riverside, in a suit asserting that a County zoning ordinance was facially invalid under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) as purportedly disallowing
GMSR prevails in major land use appeal
In Calvary Chapel Bible Fellowship v. County of Riverside, the Ninth Circuit affirmed judgment for GMSR’s client, the County of Riverside, in a suit asserting that a County zoning ordinance was facially invalid under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) as purportedly disallowing religious organizations to operate in the zone. The Ninth Circuit held that the zoning allowed construction of special occasion facilities. Nothing on the face of the statute indicates that a religious group would not be granted a permit to construct such a facility and use it for religious purposes, so there was no violation of RLUIPA. The statute merely requires public entities to treat religious uses the same as secular uses.
Gamerberg v. 3000 E. 11th St., Inc. (Jan. 21, 2020, B290755) ___ Cal.App.5th ___ [2020 WL 289092].
In a published opinion, the Court of Appeal reversed a judgment against GMSR’s client and directed the trial court to enter judgment in its favor. GMSR’s client purchased a commercial warehouse property in 1994 without actual or constructive notice of an unrecorded 1950 agreement that
Court of Appeal reverses judgment against GMSR’s client, and holds good faith purchasers are not bound by irrevocable licenses
In a published opinion, the Court of Appeal reversed a judgment against GMSR’s client and directed the trial court to enter judgment in its favor. GMSR’s client purchased a commercial warehouse property in 1994 without actual or constructive notice of an unrecorded 1950 agreement that
Corona v. City of Riverside (Oct. 22, 2019, D075558) 2019 WL 5387287 (nonpublished opinion)
While riding his bicycle, plaintiff was hit by a car in a controlled intersection. Because of his injuries, plaintiff could not recall how the accident happened, including where he was and the direction he was traveling just before the collision. He sued GMSR’s client City
Court of Appeal affirms judgment of nonsuit in favor of GMSR’s client
While riding his bicycle, plaintiff was hit by a car in a controlled intersection. Because of his injuries, plaintiff could not recall how the accident happened, including where he was and the direction he was traveling just before the collision. He sued GMSR’s client City
Court of Appeal affirms damages and fee awards in favor of real estate developers and rejects neighboring homeowners association’s million-dollar counterclaim.
GMSR’s clients acquired four parcels of land and began developing residential homesites—a process that requires frequent pre-development visits by multiple contractors. Because the land was not adjacent to public streets, the developers and their visitors accessed it by driving through a guarded gate and then
Millennium-Diamond Road Partners, LLC, et al. v. Diamond Bar Country Estates Association (Sept. 25, 2019, B285539) 2019 WL 4635158 (nonpublished opinion)
GMSR’s clients acquired four parcels of land and began developing residential homesites—a process that requires frequent pre-development visits by multiple contractors. Because the land was not adjacent to public streets, the developers and their visitors accessed it by driving through a guarded gate and then
GMSR’s client faced loss of her home on account of an unauthorized home equity loan from which she received nothing. Judgment for the lender reversed.
The issue on appeal was whether evidence of the homeowner’s execution of a written agreement with a third party ratified the third party’s previously unauthorized execution of a trust deed on her home. Since a trust deed must be in writing, under the “equal dignities
FOROUGH ETELAEI, as Trustee, et al., v. FIRST GENERAL BANK (Cal. Ct. App., June 18, 2019, No. B287186) 2019 WL 2511405
The issue on appeal was whether evidence of the homeowner’s execution of a written agreement with a third party ratified the third party’s previously unauthorized execution of a trust deed on her home. Since a trust deed must be in writing, under the “equal dignities
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.
© 2020 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.