Court of Appeal affirms dismissal of nuisance and inverse condemnation claims against GMSR’s water district client
Homeowners sued GMSR’s client, the Metropolitan Water District (MWD), as well as other water districts, for nuisance and inverse condemnation, asserting that water provided by MWD to their homes contained disinfectants that caused pinhole leaks in their plumbing. In a published opinion, the Court of
GMSR successfully defends nurses and Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputy in summary judgment appeal arising from jail death
The Ninth Circuit today affirmed summary judgment in favor of GMSR’s clients—the County of Los Angeles and a group of its employees—who were accused of deliberate indifference to a jailed patient’s medical needs. The trial court found that the plaintiffs failed to produce evidence to
The Ninth Circuit Holds That The ADA Does Not Preempt A City’s State-Law Contribution Claims Against Designers And Builders Of Deficient Public Facilities
City of Los Angeles v. AECOM Services, Inc. (9th Cir. 2017) 854 F.3d 1149. This landmark preemption decision will benefit municipalities across the country. Two disabled persons sued GMSR’s client, the City of Los Angeles, under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and
GMSR successfully defends dismissal of action in favor of public entity
In a second attempt by a restaurant owner to sue GMSR’s client, the County of Los Angeles, for allegedly imposing excessive and illegal health inspection fees, GMSR again prevailed in obtaining an affirmance of the judgment in the County’s favor based on res judicata principles.
GMSR successfully defends dismissal of action in favor of public entity
In a second attempt by a restaurant owner to sue GMSR’s client, the County of Los Angeles, for allegedly imposing excessive and illegal health inspection fees, GMSR again prevailed in obtaining an affirmance of the judgment in the County’s favor based on res judicata principles.
California Supreme Court rules in favor of GMSR’s client in holding that attorney invoices in pending legal matters are completely protected by the attorney-client privilege
L.A. County Bd. of Supervisors v. Superior Court (Dec. 29, 2016, S226645). In a 4-3 decision in Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors v. Superior Court (ACLU) the California Supreme Court agreed with GMSR’s client in holding that everything in attorney invoices in pending cases,
GMSR wins dismissal of lawsuit claiming entitlement to a reward
Heltebrake v. City of Riverside (2015) 2015 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 9469 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Five) [unpublished]. Plaintiff sued public entities that had offered a $1 million reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Christopher Dorner, claiming that
Court of Appeal holds that attorney bills transmitted to clients are confidential communications protected by the attorney client privilege
County of Los Angeles v. Superior Court (ACLU) (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 1154 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Three) [published]. The ACLU, along with an individual, made a Public Records Act request to the County of Los Angeles, seeking copies of billing statements
Court of Appeal affirms summary judgment in favor of GMSR’s public entity client in government tort claim dispute
San Jose v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority et al. (2013) 2013 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 297 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Two) [unpublished]. GMSR’s client, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (the MTA) rejected plaintiff’s government tort claim through its duly
Court of Appeal issues writ of mandate ordering trial court to grant summary judgment in a dog-attack case
County of Los Angeles v. Superior Court (Faten) (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 543 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Eight) [published]. Plaintiffs were attacked by two of a neighbor’s many dogs. They sued the County, GMSR’s client, arguing that its Department of Animal Care
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.
GMSR represents insurers on appeal effectively and efficiently. We also collaborate with our clients and trial counsel on strategy for coverage, contribution and bad faith litigation before appeals begin.
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.
© 2026 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
Orange County
555 Anton Blvd, Suite 150
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
P: (310) 859-7811
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.