Ninth Circuit affirms grant of summary judgment in civil rights case
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 LEXIS 20536 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) [unpublished].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
Court of Appeal affirms order granting lawyer’s anti-SLAPP motion in malicious prosecution action
Roosen v. Farrell (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 7115 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division One) [unpublished]. The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order dismissing a malicious prosecution action against GMSR’s attorney client under the anti-SLAPP statute. The malicious prosecution action
Ninth Circuit clarifies the scope of the work-for-hire doctrine and reinstates a multimillion-dollar copyright judgment for GMSR’s client
Jules Jordan Video, Inc. v. 144942 Canada Inc., et al. (9th Cir. 2010) 617 F.3d 1146 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) [published]. In a published opinion, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated a $2.6 million judgment for GMSR’s client in
Court of Appeal affirms order denying motion to recover attorney’s fees from GMSR’s client under Family Code section 2030
In re Marriage of Armour/Ritter (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 6108 (California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Eight) [unpublished]. A wife in a marital dissolution proceeding incurred almost $700,000 in attorney’s fees litigating whether the confidential documents of her husband’s employer, which the spouses
Court of Appeal affirms demurrer for County of Los Angeles in detainee’s suit for denial of medication
Arellano v. County of Los Angeles (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 5903 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Two) [unpublished]. Plaintiff sued GMSR’s client, the County of Los Angeles, alleging that County employees violated the Ralph Civil Rights Act of 1976, the Tom
Court reverses $15+ million judgment against GMSR’s client, invalidating CACI instruction regarding determination of employee or independent contractor status
Bowman v. Tommie Wyatt, Jr., et al. (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 286 (California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Four) [published]. A jury found that GMSR’s client, the City of Los Angeles, was vicariously liable for the negligence of a truck driver who was under contract
Court affirms $8 million arbitration award in favor of GMSR’s client
Greenspan v. LADT, LLC (2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 1413 (Greenspan I) (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division One). In an arbitration arising out of a real estate contract, GMSR’s client won an $8 million award. The defendants sought to vacate it on grounds that
US Supreme Court unanimously rules in favor of GMSR’s clients in workplace privacy case
City of Ontario v. Quon, 560 U.S. 746, 130 S.Ct. 2619, 177 L.Ed.2d 216 (2010) (United States Supreme Court). For the third time in four years, the Supreme Court of the United States has issued a unanimous ruling in favor of GMSR. In City of
Court of Appeal affirms $3.2 million judgment for movie studio’s underpayment of profit participation and reverses a nonsuit on fraud and other claims
Alan Ladd Jr. v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1298 (California Second Appellate District, Division Three) [partially published]. GMSR represented Academy Award-winning producers Alan Ladd Jr. and Jay Kanter, whose films include Chariots of Fire, Blade Runner and Body Heat. They sued Warner
Court of Appeal holds that wheeling a patient between testing rooms in a hospital is the provision of health care for purposes of the statute of limitations
Torihara v. The Regents of the University of California (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 3690 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Eight) [unpublished]. Plaintiff injured his foot when the wheelchair in which he was riding hit a wall. He was in the hospital
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.