GMSR Wins Affirmance Of Anti-SLAPP Ruling
Melamed v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (2017) 8 Cal.App.5th 1271. A physician sued a hospital and some doctors, alleging that the summary suspension of his medical staff privileges was motivated by retaliatory animus. The Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal of the suit under the anti-SLAPP statute. On the first
California Supreme Court rules in favor of GMSR’s client in holding that attorney invoices in pending legal matters are completely protected by the attorney-client privilege
L.A. County Bd. of Supervisors v. Superior Court (Dec. 29, 2016, S226645). In a 4-3 decision in Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors v. Superior Court (ACLU) the California Supreme Court agreed with GMSR’s client in holding that everything in attorney invoices in pending cases,
GMSR obtains dismissal of appeal from summary judgment
Malbrue v. County of Los Angeles, 2016 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 8977. Plaintiff sued for the wrongful death of his father who died while in police custody. The court granted summary judgment for GMSR’s client, the County of Los Angeles, after plaintiff failed timely to introduce
GMSR secures another win on appeal, this time in Santa Clarita Organization for Planning and the Environment v. Castaic Lake Water Agency
Santa Clarita Org. for Planning & Environment v. Castaic Lake Water Agency (2016) 1 Cal.App.5th 1084. In a published opinion, Division 2 of the Second DCA upheld the right of GMSR’s client, the Castaic Lake Water Agency, to acquire all of the stock of a privately
GMSR obtains reversal of summary judgment against its client
Michelson v. Proskauer Rose, LLP, 2016 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 4701. GMSR’s client sued a law firm for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and legal malpractice, based upon the firm’s issuance of opinion letters regarding purportedly tax-advantaged investments that the Internal Revenue Service later determined were
GMSR obtains the vacating of a default judgment and award for attorney fees against one client, and affirmation of a finding of qualified immunity in favor of another
Figueroa v. County of Los Angeles (9th Cir. 2016) 651 Fed.Appx. 709. In an action alleging excessive force arising out of an incident in the Visitor’s Center of the Men’s Central Jail, the Ninth Circuit vacated a default judgment against one of two GMSR clients
Maine Supreme Judicial Court adopts proof standards for product liability
Grant v. Foster Wheeler, LLC, et al. (2016) 2016 ME 85 (Maine Supreme Judicial Court) [published]. Announcing new law in Maine, the court affirmed summary judgment for GMSR’s client Warren Pumps, LLC, and other manufacturers on whose behalf we briefed the key issues. Maine’s highest
GMSR successfully defends judgment enforcing settlement agreement
Martinez v. Southern California Edison Company (2016) 2016 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 3945 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three) [unpublished]. The plaintiff was injured while trimming trees and sued GMSR’s client, Southern California Edison, and one of Edison’s subcontractors. When the subcontractor’s default
GMSR wins affirmance of judgment enforcing prospective liability waiver
Murphy v. Richardson (2016) 2016 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 1732 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division One) [unpublished]. Plaintiff sued a religious sober-living home where he resided, for injuries he suffered in a car accident when a home employee was driving him to apply for
Overcoming insider objections about valuation, GMSR obtains affirmance in Ninth Circuit appeal from confirmation of a Chapter 11 reorganization plan
In re Meruelo Maddux Properties, Inc. (9th Cir. 2016) 637 Fed.Appx. 1012 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) [unpublished]. After the U.S. District Court affirmed the U.S. Bankruptcy Court’s confirmation of a Chapter 11 reorganization plan, a majority block of the debtor-in-possession’s
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.
© 2024 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.