GMSR has helped shape constitutional law, handling cutting-edge cases involving privacy, searches and seizures, due process, and the First Amendment. In addition to extensive experience in the federal circuit courts, GMSR has also appeared repeatedly in the U.S. Supreme Court in recent years.
In yet another United States Supreme Court victory for GMSR—the sixth victory in seven cases— the Court shields police officers from personal liability for obtaining a search warrant they could reasonably have believed valid
Messerschmidt v. Millender (2012) 565 U.S. 535 [132 S.Ct. 1235] (United States Supreme Court). Tim Coates and Lillie Hsu obtained a 6-3 decision from the United States Supreme Court for two Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputies in Messerschmidt v. Millender (2012) 565 U.S. 535 [132
Court of Appeal reverses judgment against GMSR’s clients, finding no due process violation in charter school revocation proceedings
Today’s Fresh Start, Inc. v. Los Angeles County Office of Education, et al. (2011) 197 Cal.App.4th 436 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division One) [published]. Following administrative proceedings, GMSR’s client, Los Angeles County Board of Education, revoked the charter of Today’s Fresh Start,
GMSR in the United States Supreme Court for the sixth time in six years
After having two cases before the Court during the October 2010 term, Los Angeles County v. Humphries (2010) 562 U.S. 29, 131 S.Ct. 447 and Stern v. Marshall (2011) 564 U.S. 462; 131 S.Ct. 2594, GMSR will return to the high court during the 2011
Stern v. Marshall (2011) 564 U.S. 462
The Supreme Court held that a bankruptcy court has statutory authority to enter final judgment on a debtor’s state-law counterclaims against a creditor, but that Article III of the United States Constitution makes the statutory grant unconstitutional. It also held that 28 U.S.C. section 157(b)(5), which specifies that district courts must order that “personal injury tort and wrongful death claims” be tried in district court, is not jurisdictional and creditors can consent, through their conduct, to a bankruptcy court resolving such claims.
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.
City of Ontario v. Quon (2010) 560 U.S. 746
Expectation of privacy in messages sent and received on his employer-issued device; Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures
Popping Britney’s Personal Safety Bubble: Why Proposed Anti-Paparazzi Ordinances in Los Angeles Cannot Withstand First Amendment Scrutiny (2010) 30 Loy. L.A. Ent. L.Rev. 133.
Lawmakers have suggested a wide range of possibilities to curtail paparazzi activity in the Los Angeles area, such as “requiring all ‘celebrity photographers’ to file for a permit, . . . taxing revenues generated from the photos,” and, most controversially, creating floating “buffer zones” or
McCullock v. Los Angeles County Sheriff (9th Cir. 2009) 320 Fed.Appx. 814
Civil rights action based on denial of medication to prisoner
Van de Kamp v. Goldstein (2009) 555 U.S. 335
Prosecutorial immunity applies to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims concerning the manner in which the prosecutor’s office implemented policies and training for jailhouse informants
Humphries v. Los Angeles County (9th Cir. 2009) 554 F.3d 1170
Due process claim based on list of suspected child abusers maintained by California Department of Justice
Browse By Practice Area
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.