GMSR’s appellate work has been on the leading edge of important tort issues, running the gamut from duty to breach to causation and damages. GMSR’s substantive experience includes personal injury, property damage, fraud and misrepresentation, products liability, landowner liability, vicarious liability, defamation and invasion of privacy, and construction defects.
Miller v. Ron Taylor Drilling (Aug. 31, 2011, B225621) 2011 WL 3841073 [nonpublished opinion]
The defendant’s vehicle, traveling at about 3 or 4 miles per hour, tapped the plaintiff’s car, which was waiting at a traffic light. The plaintiff later had two major back/neck operations, which that he attributed in his lawsuit to the accident, and his wife claimed
Court of Appeal affirms defense verdict in automobile case for GMSR’s client
Miller v. Ron Taylor Drilling (2011) 2011 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 6635 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Six) [unpublished]. The defendant’s vehicle, traveling at about 3 or 4 miles per hour, tapped the plaintiff’s car, which was waiting at a traffic light. The
Howell v. Hamilton Meats & Provisions, Inc. (2011) 52 Cal.4th 541 (amicus)
Recovery for economic medical damages
GMSR achieves substantial reduction in damages in STD transmission case
A jury found that GMSR’s client transmitted herpes to the plaintiff, and it awarded $6,753,000 in compensatory and punitive damages. The compensatory damages included $2,500,000 for future medical expenses. On appeal, GMSR demonstrated that there was no substantial evidence of future medical expenses beyond the
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.
Bowman v. Wyatt (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 286
Standard jury instruction, CACI 3704, misstates employee/independent contractor tortfeasor test. Peculiar risk doctrine inapplicable to driving unloaded dump truck
Court reverses $15+ million judgment against GMSR’s client, invalidating CACI instruction regarding determination of employee or independent contractor status
Bowman v. Tommie Wyatt, Jr., et al. (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 286 (California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Four) [published]. A jury found that GMSR’s client, the City of Los Angeles, was vicariously liable for the negligence of a truck driver who was under contract
Bazzini v. Technicolor, Inc. (Jan. 21, 2010, B205947) 2010 WL 186157 [nonpublished opinion]
Plaintiffs, a husband and wife, sued the husband’s former employer, GMSR’s client, for injuries allegedly resulting from the husband’s exposure to chemicals in his job. Plaintiffs asserted they were not limited to workers’ compensation remedies because GMSR’s client fraudulently concealed that the husband’s exposure to
Court of Appeal holds that fraudulent concealment exception to workers’ compensation exclusivity is inapplicable where employer lacks knowledge that employee’s symptoms may lead to cancer
Bazzini v. Technicolor, Inc. (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 390 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Three) [unpublished]. Plaintiffs, a husband and wife, sued the husband’s former employer, GMSR’s client, for injuries allegedly resulting from the husband’s exposure to chemicals in his job.
Holmes v. Tsou (Jan. 19, 2010, B204745) 2010 WL 161489 [nonpublished opinion]
Plaintiff sought treatment for her fractured wrist from GMSR’s client, defendant orthopedist. The orthopedist concluded that surgery was not a reasonable option for her, performed a nonsurgical procedure instead and never discussed surgery with her. Plaintiff then sued the orthopedist, alleging that he was negligent
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.