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.
3500 Sepulveda, LLC v. Macy’s West Stores, Inc. (9th Cir., Nov. 20, 2020, No. 18-56620) __F.3d___, 2020 WL 6815082
GMSR’s clients, who own a building in the Manhattan Village shopping center, agreed with defendant owner of the remainder of the center to a revitalization construction project that would increase the amount of parking near the clients’ building. Soon, the defendant began making significant changes
In published opinion, Ninth Circuit revives building owners’ easement complaint previously dismissed on summary judgment
GMSR’s clients, who own a building in the Manhattan Village shopping center, agreed with defendant owner of the remainder of the center to a revitalization construction project that would increase the amount of parking near the clients’ building. Soon, the defendant began making significant changes
In Published Opinion, Court Of Appeal Upholds GMSR Client’s Right To New Trial
Plaintiff sued GMSR’s clients for wrongful foreclosure after they purchased a real property loan on which plaintiff had defaulted. The matter proceeded to a judicial reference, which resulted in a determination by the referee that GMSR’s clients were liable for millions in both compensatory and
Yu v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (October 27, 2020) __ Cal.App.5th __ [2020 WL 6281295]
Plaintiff sued GMSR’s clients for wrongful foreclosure after they purchased a real property loan on which plaintiff had defaulted. The matter proceeded to a judicial reference, which resulted in a determination by the referee that GMSR’s clients were liable for millions in both compensatory and
Rosenthal v. City of Oakland (August 27, 2020, A156881) 2020 WL 5051440 [nonpublished opinion]
Plaintiff tripped and fell over a defect on a municipal sidewalk next to property owned by GMSR’s client, Street 41, LLC. He sued the City of Oakland and Street 41 for failing to maintain the sidewalk. The trial court granted the City’s and Street 41’s
Court of Appeal affirmed grants for summary judgment for GMSR’s private landowner client
Plaintiff tripped and fell over a defect on a municipal sidewalk next to property owned by GMSR’s client, Street 41, LLC. He sued the City of Oakland and Street 41 for failing to maintain the sidewalk. The trial court granted the City’s and Street 41’s
8451 Melrose Property, LLC v. Akhtarzad (May 28, 2020, B288963) 2020 WL 2765575 [nonpublished opinion]
Court of Appeal Opinion – View Document
Calvary Chapel Bible Fellowship v. County of Riverside (9th Cir. 2020) 948 F.3d 1172
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., LLC (2020) 44 Cal.App.5th 424
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
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.