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.
Moore v. USC University Hospital, Inc. (9th Cir. 2011) 416 Fed.Appx. 640
Expert testimony on causation held insufficient in medical malpractice lawsuit
Greenspan v. LADT, LLC (2010) 191 Cal.App.4th 486
Court reverses trial court’s refusal to add alter ego judgment debtors, holding that alter ego liability applies equally to trustees
Parks Legal Defense Fund v. City of Huntington Beach (Dec. 13, 2010, G043109) 2010 WL 5066160 [nonpublished opinion]
The City of Huntington Beach, GMSR’s client, planned to construct a state-of-the-art senior center in one of its parks. The trial court halted the project. Among other things, it found that the funding mechanism for the center was an illegal use of fees assessed against
Los Angeles County v. Humphries (2010) 562 U.S. 29
No declaratory or injunctive relief available in civil rights action against municipality under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 absent wrongful policy, custom or practice approved or knowingly tolerated by local public entity policymakers.
Delgado v. City of Riverside (Nov. 16, 2010, E049898) 2010 WL 4621515 [nonpublished opinion]
A jury convicted Gerardo Delgado of resisting police officers who were attempting to arrest him. Delgado then filed a civil rights suit alleging that it was unreasonable for the officers to use deadly force during the encounter. GMSR represented the police officers and the City
Shah v. County of Los Angeles (9th Cir. 2010) 399 Fed.Appx. 305
The Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in Shah v. County of Los Angeles, et al., affirming a judgment in favor of our client, County of Los Angeles. In addition to affirming dismissal of the plaintiff’s employment discrimination claims, the Ninth Circuit also affirmed the district
Ra El v. Crain (9th Cir. 2010) 399 Fed.Appx. 180
Pro se plaintiff Ankhenaten Ra El’s civil rights complaint alleged a large number of constitutional violations arising out of two separate arrests. Among them were claims for excessive force, unlawful search and seizure, racial discrimination, retaliation, probable cause, and violations of rights under Brady v.
Roosen v. Farrell (Aug. 27, 2010, B209873) 2010 WL 3371510 [nonpublished opinion]
The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order dismissing a malicious prosecution action against GMSR’s attorney client under the anti-SLAPP statute. The malicious prosecution action was based on cross-claims that the attorney had filed against the plaintiff in a complex network of probate proceedings.
Price v. Stossel (9th Cir. 2010) 620 F.3d 992
Ninth Circuit holds that district court erred in dismissing GMSR’s client’s express defamation claim against ABC on anti-SLAPP grounds.
Jules Jordan Video, Inc. v. 144942 Canada Inc. (9th Cir. 2010) 617 F.3d 1146
Copyright infringement; work-for-hire doctrine
© 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.