Court of Appeal holds radiologist not qualified to opine on family medicine physician’s standard of care
Levitt v. Ross (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 3598 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Two) [unpublished]. After plaintiff complained of a possible pea-sized breast lump, defendant—her family medicine doctor—sent her for imaging studies, which gave her a clean bill of health. Eighteen
Court of Appeal affirms judgment in favor of GMSR’s clients in legal malpractice action
Lockton v. O’Rourke (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1051 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Four) [published]. A sophisticated businessman hired GMSR’s clients to bring suit against various individuals and entities that he claimed had fraudulently settled litigation arising out of his ouster from a
Court of Appeal affirms dismissal of plaintiff’s medical malpractice action on statute of limitations
Gordon v. Kawamoto (2010) 2010 Cal.App Unpub. LEXIS 2577 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division One) [unpublished]. Injuries suffered allegedly as a result of surgery at UCSD in November 2003 following a dune buggy accident. Action filed in April 2007 was for injuries
Court of Appeal affirms summary judgment for hospital in medical malpractice case where plaintiff has no expert evidence
Jackson v. San Leandro Hospital (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 2060 (California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Two) [unpublished]. Plaintiff suffered injuries suffered allegedly as a result of IV Dilantin administered to her for seizures. Defense introduced expert testimony that nothing the hospital
Court of Appeal reverses probate court order refusing to enforce charitable testamentary gift
Banks v. Pacific Homes Foundation (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 1942 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Five) [unpublished]. The petitioner, as successor trustee, sought a determination that a substantial gift to GMSR’s client, Pacific Homes Foundation, had lapsed and that the gift
Court of Appeal confirms that insurer was justified in denying insurance benefits
Bridal Images, Inc. v. Truck Insurance Exchange (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 1001 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Five) [unpublished]. The plaintiff, a designer and merchant of bridal gowns and accessories, sued its insurer, GMSR’s client, for breach of contract and insurance
Court of Appeal affirms order denying reconsideration of summary judgment where plaintiff failed to file opposition to original motion
Arellano v. The Regents of the University of California (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 986 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three) [unpublished]. Plaintiff was represented by two law firms, neither of which prepared or filed opposition to the defendant’s motion for summary
Court of Appeal holds that fraudulent concealment exception to workers’ compensation exclusivity is inapplicable where employer lacks knowledge that employee’s symptoms may lead to cancer
Bazzini v. Technicolor, Inc. (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 390 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Three) [unpublished]. Plaintiffs, a husband and wife, sued the husband’s former employer, GMSR’s client, for injuries allegedly resulting from the husband’s exposure to chemicals in his job.
Court of Appeal rejects plaintiff’s claim that she was entitled to special jury instructions, finding that CACI instructions adequately encompassed the issues
Holmes v. Tsou (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 338 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Seven) [unpublished]. Plaintiff sought treatment for her fractured wrist from GMSR’s client, defendant orthopedist. The orthopedist concluded that surgery was not a reasonable option for her, performed a
Court of Appeal reverses dismissal of trade secret misappropriation claims
Jasmine Networks, Inc v. Superior Court (2009) 180 Cal.App.4th 980 (California Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District). The trial court dismissed a trade secrets misappropriation suit on the eve of trial, concluding that the plaintiff lost standing to pursue its claims when it sold what
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.