Leung v. Verdugo Hills Hospital (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 971 / 2011 Cal.App. LEXIS 335 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Four) [partially published]. Plaintiff sued a pediatrician and a hospital, GMSR’s client, for injuries arising out of untreated jaundice. Plaintiff settled with the
A jury found that GMSR’s client transmitted herpes to the plaintiff, and it awarded $6,753,000 in compensatory and punitive damages. The compensatory damages included $2,500,000 for future medical expenses. On appeal, GMSR demonstrated that there was no substantial evidence of future medical expenses beyond the
Moore v. USC University Hospital, Inc. (9th Cir. 2011) 416 Fed.Appx. 640, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 3860 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) [unpublished]. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of GMSR’s client, USC University
Takahashi v. Snell & Wilmer LLP (Jan. 12, 2011, G041728) 2011 WL 96468 [California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3]. The Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment in favor of GMSR’s client, a law firm sued for legal malpractice, including the award of almost
Greenspan v. LADT, LLC (2010) 191 Cal.App.4th 486 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division One) [published]. While attempting to collect an $8 million arbitration award that GMSR had successfully defended against vacatur, GMSR’s client learned that the defendant companies had transferred nearly all
Parks Legal Defense Fund v. City of Huntington Beach (2010) 2010 Cal.App.Unpub. LEXIS 9862 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three) [unpublished]. The City of Huntington Beach, GMSR’s client, planned to construct a state-of-the-art senior center in one of its parks. The trial
Los Angeles County v. Humphries (2010) 562 U.S. 29 [131 S.Ct. 447] (United States Supreme Court). Tim Coates, Alison Turner and Lillie Hsu obtained a unanimous decision from the United States Supreme Court for the County of Los Angeles in Los Angeles County v. Humphries
Delgado v. City of Riverside (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 9084 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Two) [unpublished]. A jury convicted Gerardo Delgado of resisting police officers who were attempting to arrest him. Delgado then filed a civil rights suit alleging that it
Shah v. County of Los Angeles (9th Cir. 2010) 399 Fed.Appx. 305, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 21116 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) [unpublished]. The Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in Shah v. County of Los Angeles, et al., affirming a judgment
Ra El v. Crain (9th Cir. 2010) 399 Fed.Appx. 180, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 20536 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) [unpublished]. Pro se plaintiff Ankhenaten Ra El’s civil rights complaint alleged a large number of constitutional violations arising out of two
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.