GMSR’s appellate work has been on the leading edge of important tort issues, running the gamut from duty to breach to causation and damages. GMSR’s substantive experience includes personal injury, property damage, fraud and misrepresentation, products liability, landowner liability, vicarious liability, defamation and invasion of privacy, and construction defects.
Ninth Circuit affirms summary judgment for GMSR clients, holding a claimed “dying declaration” inadmissible
Plaintiff’s attorney in this asbestos case presented a declaration just before plaintiff’s death, purporting to identify the manufacturers of products he was exposed to decades earlier. Plaintiff signed the document the day before he died. The Ninth Circuit held that the document did not fit
Varney v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (9th Cir., March 1, 2021, No. 19-35859) 2021 WL 777816
Plaintiff’s attorney in this asbestos case presented a declaration just before plaintiff’s death, purporting to identify the manufacturers of products he was exposed to decades earlier. Plaintiff signed the document the day before he died. The Ninth Circuit held that the document did not fit
GMSR Obtains Reversal Of $15 Million Punitive Damages Award
GMSR convinced the Court of Appeal to reverse a $15 million punitive damages award against GMSR’s client in a case involving alleged exposure to asbestos-cement pipe. The Court of Appeal rejected plaintiffs’ argument that there was an exception to the “officer, director, or managing agent”
Morgan v. J-M Manufacturing Co., Inc. (Jan. 27, 2021, No. B297393) Cal.App.5th.
GMSR convinced the Court of Appeal to reverse a $15 million punitive damages award against GMSR’s client in a case involving alleged exposure to asbestos-cement pipe. The Court of Appeal rejected plaintiffs’ argument that there was an exception to the “officer, director, or managing agent”
B.Q. v. Mesa Union School Dist. (Cal.App., Dec. 2, 2020, No. B303351) 2020 WL 7052293 [nonpublished opinion]
On the heels of a Ninth Circuit victory relating to the same events, the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of a student’s discrimination claim for failure to comply with the Government Claims Act. Deciding an issue of first impression, the Second District
GMSR wins second appeal relating to student’s discrimination claim against school district
On the heels of a Ninth Circuit victory relating to the same events, the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of a student’s discrimination claim for failure to comply with the Government Claims Act. Deciding an issue of first impression, the Second District
Mata v. Liberty Utilities (Nov. 19, 2020, B293479) 2020 WL ___ [nonpublished opinion]
Plaintiff claimed take-home asbestos injury from his father’s job at GMSR’s client, a water utility, where the father occasionally cut asbestos pipe. The jury awarded compensatory and punitive damages. The trial court struck the punitive damages on the ground that there was no evidence that
Court of Appeal affirms judgment notwithstanding the verdict for water utility
Plaintiff claimed take-home asbestos injury from his father’s job at GMSR’s client, a water utility, where the father occasionally cut asbestos pipe. The jury awarded compensatory and punitive damages. The trial court struck the punitive damages on the ground that there was no evidence that
Court of Appeal confirms that the Public Utilities Commission still has exclusive jurisdiction over claims alleging injury from electromagnetic fields
Plaintiff alleged that she suffered injury from exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) at her apartment building, to which GMSR’s client Southern California Edison provided power. Edison successfully demurred based on directly controlling California Supreme Court authority—San Diego Gas and Electric Company v. Superior Court (Covalt)
Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc. (2020) 9 Cal.5th 1130
Plaintiff had an at-will contract with a non-party to develop a drug based on a certain active ingredient. Defendant Biogen reached its own deal with that non-party to settle patent disputes and to license the same active ingredient—requiring that the at-will contract with Plaintiff be
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.