Court of Appeal affirms judgment where appellant fails to provide sufficient record for review
Billups v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 4970 (California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Five) [unpublished]. A bus rider sued the MTA for injuries allegedly suffered as a result of falling on a bus. Following a defense verdict,
Ninth Circuit reverses judgment against GMSR client based on failure to submit matter to neutral arbitrator
Karcher Firestopping, Inc. v. Local No. 5, International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers (2008) 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 12236 Ninth Circuit Case Nos. 06-56728 and 07-5520 [unpublished ]. A labor union filed a grievance against GMSR’s client and the client invoked
Court of Appeal reverses defense judgment in artist royalty case
HLC Properties v. MCA Records (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 3993 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Five) [unpublished]. GMSR’s clients, the heirs of legendary performer Bing Crosby, sued MCA Records for unpaid royalties. Because it concluded that the claims were equitable in
Ninth Circuit affirms summary judgment in favor of GMSR clients in civil rights action
Robertson v. County of Ventura (9th Cir. 2008) 275 Fed.Appx. 594, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 9071 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) [published]. The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for two physicians who had been sued for violation of civil rights under
Court of Appeal reverses judgment and fee award against GMSR’s clients
The buyers of a business sued the sellers, GMSR’s clients. The jury found that the sellers had committed fraud (both concealment and misrepresentation), for which it awarded compensatory and punitive damages. It also found that the buyers had breached the promissory note that represented part
Court of Appeal finds MICRA protection for registered social worker and licensed health care facility
Prince v. Sutter Health Central (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 971 (California Third District Court of Appeal) [published]. Plaintiffs in this professional negligence case sought noneconomic damages in excess of the MICRA cap (Civ. Code § 3333.2) from GMSR’s clients, a registered social worker and her employer,
Court affirms summary judgment for GMSR client, ruling that insured had no benefits to assign to home buyer for damage occurring after insured sold property
Edwards v. Fire Insurance Exchange (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 2428 (California Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division One) [unpublished]. Plaintiff purchased a house. The seller remained on the mortgage, however, and plaintiff buyer still owed a portion of the purchase price. Several days later,
False imprisonment coverage does not extend to sexual advances
Lyons v. Fire Insurance Exchange (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 880 (California Second District Court of Appeal, Division Two) [published]. A former professional baseball player and sometime network announcer made advances in a hotel hallway to a woman who had been flirting with him. He pulled her
Court of Appeal reverses $27 million judgment and awards costs for GMSR’s clients
Robins v. Roland (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 1929 (California Second District Court of Appeal, Division One) [unpublished]. Two members of a purported partnership attempted to withdraw (or “dissociate”) and force the remaining partner to buy them out. The remaining partner disputed the existence of
Court of Appeal reverses largest land-use judgment ever awarded in Santa Barbara County and orders judgment for GMSR’s clients
Adam Bros. Farming, Inc. v. County of Santa Barbara (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 1831 (California Second District Court of Appeal, Division Six) [unpublished]. Two family agribusiness entities sued Santa Barbara County under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a supposed civil rights deprivation based on
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.