21st Century Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 322 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two) [published]. Plaintiff was injured in an auto accident. He sued the insured. The carrier, GMSR’s client, defended under a $100,000 limits policy. The plaintiff and
In Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., LLC (2015) 61 Cal.4th 899 (California Supreme Court), the arbitration clause in a standard auto purchase contract used by most California car dealers mandated: (1) arbitration before a single arbitrator on an individual basis, waiving any class action; (2)
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
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 LEXIS 3361 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Seven) [unpublished].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,
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
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
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
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 LEXIS 9294 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two) [unpublished].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
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
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
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.
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.