California Supreme Court fundamentally alters probate law
In re Estate of Duke (2015) 61 Cal.4th 871 (California Supreme Court). From time immemorial, courts throughout the United States have been powerless to correct drafting mistakes in wills no matter how clearly the evidence established the testator’s actual intent. Courts could use the doctrine
Court of Appeal reverses quiet title summary judgment against GMSR’s client
Perez v. Wiesand (2015) 2015 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 3361 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Seven) [unpublished]. GMSR’s client was a defendant in a quiet title action between family members over ownership of two rental properties. A grandson successfully moved for summary judgment,
Court of Appeal reverses probate court order dismissing GMSR’s client’s petition for failure to file a creditor’s claim
Novak v. Fay (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 329 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Five) [published]. GMSR’s client, an attorney, agreed to represent a husband under a contingent-fee arrangement in a suit against the estate of his late wife on a pretermitted-heir theory. In
Court of Appeal holds that attorney bills transmitted to clients are confidential communications protected by the attorney client privilege
County of Los Angeles v. Superior Court (ACLU) (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 1154 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Three) [published]. The ACLU, along with an individual, made a Public Records Act request to the County of Los Angeles, seeking copies of billing statements
Court of Appeal reverses $4 million emotional distress judgment
Wilson v. Southern California Edison (2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 123 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Four) [published]. The plaintiff experienced what she called a “tingling sensation” at her showerhead that turned out to be stray voltage emanating from the next-door power substation owned
Court of Appeal affirms trial court order reforming $100 million trust
Crowe v. Tweten (2014) 2014 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 9294 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two) [unpublished]. An elderly couple devised an estate plan with the assistance of counsel. They repeatedly stated that their intent was for the surviving spouse to inherit everything
Court of Appeal affirms defense summary judgment in medical malpractice case
Rebecca Sperber v. The Regents of the University of California (2014) 2014 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 8117 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Three) [unpublished]. GMSR’s clients, the Regents and several of its doctors, obtained summary judgment in a medical negligence action with expert
Court of Appeal rules that animal control officer assumes the risk of being bitten in directing that summary judgment be entered for GMSR’s client
Breeden v. Superior Court (2014) 2014 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 7216 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two) [unpublished]. Two pet pit bulls mauled an animal control officer who was attempting to impound them. The animal control officer sued the dogs’ owner and the
GMSR successfully defends client against claimed $7.5 million post-judgment interest windfall
Leung v. Verdugo Hills Hospital (Sept. 29, 2014, B251366) 2014 WL 4807719 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Four) [unpublished]. The Court of Appeal affirmed post-judgment orders denying plaintiff $7.5 million in post-judgment interest over and above what the Hospital paid under the
Court of Appeal affirms application of anti-SLAPP statute to summary suspension of medical staff privileges
Adams v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (2014) 2014 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 5942 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Three) [unpublished]. Two years after Cedars-Sinai summarily suspended a physician’s medical staff privileges, he sued Cedars-Sinai for denial of his right to practice medicine. The trial
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.