Lopez v. Dayton, S285689.
#24-148 Lopez v. Dayton, S285689. (A168458; nonpublished opinion; Contra Costa County Superior Court; C2100204.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed an order in a civil action. The court ordered briefing deferred pending decision in Gutierrez v. Tostado, S283128 (#24-59), which presents the
City of San Jose v. Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, S285426
#24-145 City of San Jose v. Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, S285426. (H050889; 101 Cal.App.5th 777; Santa Clara County Superior Court; 21CV391517.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in a civil action. The court limited review to the following issue: Is
John’s Grill, Inc. v. The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., S278481.
#23-58 John’s Grill, Inc. v. The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., S278481. (A162709; 86 Cal.App.5th 1195; San Francisco County Superior Court; CGC20584184.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part the judgment in a civil action. This case
Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc., S271721.
#22-03 Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc., S271721. (B304701; 69 Cal.App.5th 955; Los Angeles County Superior Court; BC714153.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in a civil action. The court limited review to the following issue: Does a plaintiff in a representative
Meinhardt v. City of Sunnyvale, S274147.
#22-158 Meinhardt v. City of Sunnyvale, S274147. (D079451; 76 Cal.App.5th 43; Santa Clara County Superior Court; 19CV346911.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from the judgment in an action for writ of administrative mandate. The court limited review to the
Bailey v. San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, S265223.
#20-396 Bailey v. San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, S265223. (A153520; nonpublished opinion; San Francisco County Superior Court; CGC15549675.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the following issue: Did the Court of Appeal properly
Quach v. California Commerce Club, Inc., S275121.
#22-234 Quach v. California Commerce Club, Inc., S275121. (B310458; 78 Cal.App.5th 470; Los Angeles County Superior Court; 19STCV42445.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed an order denying a petition to compel arbitration in a civil action. This case presents the following issue:
Castellanos v. State of California, S279622.
#23-128 Castellanos v. State of California, S279622. (A163655; 89 Cal.App.5th 131, mod. 90 Cal.App.5th 84a; Alameda County Superior Court; RG21088725.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part the judgment in an action for writ of mandate. This
Stiles v. Kia Motors America, S285433.
#24-138 Stiles v. Kia Motors America, S285433. (B325798; 101 Cal.App.5th 913; Ventura County Superior Court; 56-2019-00527171-CU-BC-VTA.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action. The court ordered briefing deferred pending decision in Rodriguez v. FCA US, LLC, S274625
Downey v. City of Riverside, S280322.
#23-147 Downey v. City of Riverside, S280322. (D080377; 90 Cal.App.5th 1033; Riverside County Superior Court; RIC1905830.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in a civil action. This case presents the following issue: In order to recover damages for negligent infliction
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.