Court affirms nonsuit In favor of GMSR’s client in medical malpractice case
Frisch v. Roberts, et al. (2011) 2011 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 4194 (California Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District) [unpublished]. The Sixth District Court of Appeal has affirmed judgment in favor of defendants, including GMSR’s clients, Sutter Health and Palo Alto Medical Foundation. The plaintiff alleged
Court affirms denial of attorney fee award to opponent of GMSR’s public entity client
Martinez v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 1038 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division One) [published]. Plaintiff accepted a settlement offer under Code of Civil Procedure section 998 from GMSR’s client, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. The offer
Employer’s failure to add hours on wage statement causes no injury
Hill v. Sullivan Automotive Group, LLC (2011) 2011 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 3726 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Seven) [unpublished]. California law requires that an employee’s wage statement state regular, overtime, and total hours worked. Affirming summary judgment for GMSR’s client in a
Serving pro bono, Alana and Jonathan Rotter win Ninth Circuit reversal of order denying immigrants’ petition for relief
Cruz-Carbajal v. Holder (2011) 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 8516 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) [unpublished]. Teaming up as pro bono counsel, husband and wife team Alana Rotter of GMSR and Jonathan Rotter of Kaye Scholer LLP argued that the Board of
Court affirms attorney fee award to GMSR’s public entity client
Ruttlen v. County of Los Angeles (2011) 2011 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 2389 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Three) [unpublished]. In a prior appeal, the court affirmed the trial court’s grant of the anti-SLAPP motion filed by GMSR’s client, the County of Los
Court of Appeal holds that hospitals do not owe patients a duty to obtain informed consent
Do v. San Leandro Hospital (2011) 2011 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 2264 (California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Five) [unpublished]. The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order sustaining a demurrer in favor of GMSR’s client, San Leandro Hospital. Plaintiff asserted claims against
Court strikes multimillion economic award against hospital based on plaintiff’s settlement with doctor
Leung v. Verdugo Hills Hospital (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 971 / 2011 Cal.App. LEXIS 335 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Four) [partially published]. Plaintiff sued a pediatrician and a hospital, GMSR’s client, for injuries arising out of untreated jaundice. Plaintiff settled with the
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
Ninth Circuit affirms summary judgment in medical malpractice case
Moore v. USC University Hospital, Inc. (9th Cir. 2011) 416 Fed.Appx. 640, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 3860 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) [unpublished]. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of GMSR’s client, USC University
Court of Appeal affirms defense judgment in legal malpractice case
Takahashi v. Snell & Wilmer LLP (Jan. 12, 2011, G041728) 2011 WL 96468 [California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3]. The Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment in favor of GMSR’s client, a law firm sued for legal malpractice, including the award of almost
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.