GMSR has a long history of representing insurance carriers on a wide range of issues, including first- and third-party coverage, excess insurance, contribution and allocation claims, as well as bad faith liability issues, such as Brandt fee questions and punitive damages. GMSR’s appellate lawyers regularly use this experience to assist clients in all facets of the appellate process. The firm also counsels both carriers and policyholders regarding their potential liabilities and rights.
Court of Appeal affirms that a homeowner’s non-specific request to an insurance agent to cover “everything in the house” creates no duty requiring the agent to advise the insured about the inadequacy of their jewelry coverage
A homeowner sought insurance coverage for his $9.5 million home in Los Angeles. He advised an insurance agent for Fire Insurance Exchange that he wanted a policy that covered “everything in the house, fully and completely.” The agent said “okay.” Fire issued a homeowner’s policy
Oshodin v. Fire Insurance Exchange (Feb. 29, 2024, B319043) 2024 WL 854436
Court of Appeal affirms that a homeowner’s non-specific request to an insurance agent to cover “everything in the house” creates no duty requiring the agent to advise the insured about the inadequacy of their jewelry coverage
Court of Appeal affirms summary judgment, holding that insurance policy does not cover infringement of models’ rights of publicity
GMSR’s insurer client issued a commercial general liability (CGL) policy to a nightclub. Club employees obtained various models’ photographs and used them in social media posts promoting the club. The models’ rights-management company sued the club, alleging that it had used the photographs without permission
GMSR defeats entertainment company’s novel appeal for pandemic coverage
Endeavor Operating Co., a media and entertainment producer, sued its commercial property insurer for coverage of losses it experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic. Endeavor argued that governmental restrictions on its ability to use venues, and property damage supposedly caused at unnamed venues by the virus
Endeavor Operating Company, LLC v. HDI Global Insurance Company (2023) 96 Cal.App.5th 420
GMSR defeats entertainment company’s novel appeal for pandemic coverage
Ninth Circuit affirms dismissal of hotel’s property insurance claim for pandemic-related business losses
HT-Seattle, operator of a large Seattle-area hotel and conference center, suffered business losses during the COVID-19 pandemic. HT-Seattle sued its property insurer (GMSR’s client) to cover these losses, claiming that the presence of COVID-19 virus at the hotel constituted “direct physical loss or damage” to
HT-Seattle Owner, LLC v. Am. Guar. & Liab. Ins. Co. (9th Cir. May 19, 2023, No. 21–35916) 2023 WL 3562996 [mem. disp.]
Ninth Circuit affirms dismissal of hotel’s property insurance claim for pandemic-related business losses
Court of Appeal affirms dismissal of movie theater’s property insurance claim for pandemic-related business losses
During the COVID-19 pandemic, Starlight Cinemas suffered business losses as a result of government closure orders and reduced ticket and concession sales. Starlight sued its property insurer (GMSR’s client) to cover these losses, claiming the closures and reduced attendance constituted “direct physical loss” to its
Starlight Cinemas, Inc. v. Massachusetts Bay Insurance Company (2023) 91 Cal.App.5th 24
Court of Appeal affirms dismissal of movie theater’s property insurance claim for pandemic-related business losses
GMSR notches another appellate win in high-stakes COVID insurance litigation
Plaintiff In-N-Out Burgers sought coverage from its property insurer for losses it argued were sustained as a result of the COVID-19 virus. Like dozens of other unsuccessful COVID-19-era lawsuits against insurance carriers, it argued there was “direct physical loss of or damage” to its property
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.