Cases
GMSR has an enviable record of success on appeal. For your convenience, the firm has provided a simple search tool for guests and clients to search that record.
Malbrue v. County of Los Angeles (Dec. 14, 2016, B264115) 2016 WL 7229831
GMSR obtains dismissal of appeal from summary judgment
Rice v. Downs (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 1213
The Court of Appeal adopted GMSR’s narrow interpretation of the intended scope of arbitrable claims and reversed the order compelling arbitration
Santa Clarita Organization for Planning & Environment v. Castaic Lake Water Agency (2016) 1 Cal.App.5th 1084.
GMSR secures another win on appeal, this time in Santa Clarita Organization for Planning and the Environment v. Castaic Lake Water Agency
Michelson v. Proskauer Rose, LLP (June 24, 2016, B259013) 2016 WL 3575243
GMSR obtains reversal of summary judgment
Figueroa v. County of Los Angeles (9th Cir. 2016) 651 Fed.Appx. 709
GMSR obtains the vacating of a default judgment and award for attorney fees against one client, and affirmation of a finding of qualified immunity in favor of another
City of Petaluma v. Superior Court (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 1023
The Court of Appeal issued a peremptory writ of mandate in favor of GMSR’s client, the City of Petaluma, directing the trial court to vacate a discovery order. The trial court had granted plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery of materials relating to a prelitigation investigation
Grant v. Foster Wheeler, LLC (Me. 2016) 140 A.3d 1242
Maine Supreme Judicial Court adopts proof standards for product liability
Martinez v. Southern California Edison Company (May 5, 2016, G051029) 2016 WL 3098968
GMSR successfully defends judgment enforcing settlement agreement
Murphy v. Richardson (Mar. 8, 2016, D067245) 2016 WL 877940
GMSR wins affirmance of judgment enforcing prospective liability waiver
In re Meruelo Maddux Properties, Inc. (9th Cir. 2016) 637 Fed.Appx. 1012
After the U.S. District Court affirmed the U.S. Bankruptcy Court’s confirmation of a Chapter 11 reorganization plan, a majority block of the debtor-in-possession’s insider equity shareholders appealed to the Ninth Circuit. As they did in the District Court, the insiders argued that the bankruptcy court
© 2025 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.