In re Marriage of Jones (2014) 2014 Cal.App. Unpub LEXIS 138 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three) [unpublished]. Wife petitioned to dissolve her marriage to husband, GMSR’s client. Husband wanted to remarry, but the dissolution proceedings bogged down in disputes over financial
Stanton v. Sims, 571 U.S. 3, 134 S. Ct. 3, 187 L. Ed. 2d 341 (2013) (United States Supreme Court). In response to GMSR’s certiorari petition, the United States Supreme Court did not simply grant the petition, but—without further briefing or oral argument—issued a full
Doctors Company v. Sherman Oaks Hospital (2013) 2013 Cal.App. Unpub. Lexis 7816 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Eight) [unpublished]. GMSR’s client, a hospital, and three doctors all settled with the claimants. One doctor obtained a good faith settlement determination. The two remaining
Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Superior Court (Bautista) (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 1199 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Seven) [published]. Despite tragic facts, the Court of Appeal issued a writ of mandate, holding that GMSR’s insurance-carrier client owed no coverage under a homeowners insurance
Adamo v. Fire Insurance Exchange (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 1286 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division One) [published]. When San Diego wildfires damaged landscaping on a homeowner’s property and several detached outbuildings, GMSR’s insurance-carrier client reimbursed the homeowner’s losses in excess of $100,000, exhausting
In re Meruelo Maddux Properties, Inc. (2013) 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112105 (United States District Court for the Central District of California). After the U.S. Bankruptcy Court confirmed a Chapter 11 reorganization plan that required a majority block of the debtor-in-possession’s insider equity shareholders to
NAMA v. Dorsey & Whitney (2013) 2013 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 5592 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Four) [unpublished]. A real estate LLC retained GMSR’s law firm client to represent its managers in a suit brought by one of the LLC’s investors. Arbitrators
Truck Insurance Exchange v. Superior Court (Golden State Developers, Inc.) (2013) 2013 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 5487 (California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division One) [unpublished]. In an insurance coverage dispute, the trial court, purporting to apply the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege, ordered
In Today’s Fresh Start v. Los Angeles County Office of Education (2013) 57 Cal.4th 197, GMSR partner Alison Turner successfully represented the Los Angeles County Office of Education and Board of Education in a case challenging the procedures for revoking a charter school’s charter. In
Corona Summit v. SPUS05 Corona Summit (2013) 2013 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 4633 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Four) [unpublished]. GMSR’s client, CB Richard Ellis Strategic Partners US Opportunity 5 LP (Fund V), had formed a single purpose entity (SPE) to purchase office
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.
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.