L.A. County Bd. of Supervisors v. Superior Court (Dec. 29, 2016, S226645). In a 4-3 decision in Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors v. Superior Court (ACLU) the California Supreme Court agreed with GMSR’s client in holding that everything in attorney invoices in pending cases,
Heltebrake v. City of Riverside (2015) 2015 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 9469 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Five) [unpublished]. Plaintiff sued public entities that had offered a $1 million reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Christopher Dorner, claiming that
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
San Jose v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority et al. (2013) 2013 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 297 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Two) [unpublished]. GMSR’s client, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (the MTA) rejected plaintiff’s government tort claim through its duly
County of Los Angeles v. Superior Court (Faten) (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 543 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Eight) [published]. Plaintiffs were attacked by two of a neighbor’s many dogs. They sued the County, GMSR’s client, arguing that its Department of Animal Care
Gregory Ell Shehee v. Leroy D. Baca, et al. (2012) 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 684 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) [unpublished memorandum]. Plaintiff sued multiple Los Angeles County officials, including GMSR client Supervisor Gloria Molina under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 (civil
Flores v. County of Los Angeles (2011) 2011 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 9332 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Two) [unpublished]. Plaintiff sued the GMSR’s client, the County of Los Angeles, for wrongful death after her daughter died in the emergency room at Martin
Los Angeles County v. Humphries (2010) 562 U.S. 29 [131 S.Ct. 447] (United States Supreme Court). Tim Coates, Alison Turner and Lillie Hsu obtained a unanimous decision from the United States Supreme Court for the County of Los Angeles in Los Angeles County v. Humphries
Delgado v. City of Riverside (2010) 2010 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 9084 (California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Two) [unpublished]. A jury convicted Gerardo Delgado of resisting police officers who were attempting to arrest him. Delgado then filed a civil rights suit alleging that it
Shah v. County of Los Angeles (9th Cir. 2010) 399 Fed.Appx. 305, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 21116 (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) [unpublished]. The Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in Shah v. County of Los Angeles, et al., affirming a judgment
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.