Court of Appeal finds MICRA protection for registered social worker and licensed health care facility
Prince v. Sutter Health Central (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 971 (California Third District Court of Appeal) [published]. Plaintiffs in this professional negligence case sought noneconomic damages in excess of the MICRA cap (Civ. Code § 3333.2) from GMSR’s clients, a registered social worker and her employer,
Court affirms summary judgment for GMSR client, ruling that insured had no benefits to assign to home buyer for damage occurring after insured sold property
Edwards v. Fire Insurance Exchange (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 2428 (California Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division One) [unpublished]. Plaintiff purchased a house. The seller remained on the mortgage, however, and plaintiff buyer still owed a portion of the purchase price. Several days later,
False imprisonment coverage does not extend to sexual advances
Lyons v. Fire Insurance Exchange (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 880 (California Second District Court of Appeal, Division Two) [published]. A former professional baseball player and sometime network announcer made advances in a hotel hallway to a woman who had been flirting with him. He pulled her
Court of Appeal reverses $27 million judgment and awards costs for GMSR’s clients
Robins v. Roland (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 1929 (California Second District Court of Appeal, Division One) [unpublished]. Two members of a purported partnership attempted to withdraw (or “dissociate”) and force the remaining partner to buy them out. The remaining partner disputed the existence of
Court of Appeal reverses largest land-use judgment ever awarded in Santa Barbara County and orders judgment for GMSR’s clients
Adam Bros. Farming, Inc. v. County of Santa Barbara (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 1831 (California Second District Court of Appeal, Division Six) [unpublished]. Two family agribusiness entities sued Santa Barbara County under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a supposed civil rights deprivation based on
Court affirms that GMSR client did not anticipatorily breach real estate contract by seeking cancellation of escrow
Guerrero v. Cordova Associates, Inc. (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 1582 (California Second District Court of Appeal, Division Four) [unpublished]. A real estate buyer contracted to buy property from the seller, GMSR’s client. The seller deposited a deed into escrow. Instead of depositing the purchase
GMSR secures court settlement approval in decade-long derivative/class action litigation
Nuanes v. Insignia Financial Group (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 1370 (California First District Court of Appeal, Division Three) [unpublished]. This complex derivative/class action was filed in 1998 and, after multiple rounds of mediated settlement negotiations, settled in 2002. The trial court approved the settlement,
Court of Appeal reverses the charging of administrative trust expenses to GMSR’s client
In the Matter of the James G. Stull Living Trust (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 697 (California Second District Court of Appeal, Division Six) [unpublished]. In approving a trust accounting involving a settlor’s trust that divided into two subtrusts upon the settlor’s death—one for the
Court of Appeal reverses dissolution of $200 million partnership and orders judgment for GMSR’s clients
Marasco v. Superior Court (Ring) (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 712 (California Second District Court of Appeal, Division Seven) [unpublished]. GMSR obtained a reversal of a trial court’s order dissolving a highly profitable real estate partnership. The partnership owned a large apartment complex on a
Court of Appeal affirms judgment where appellant fails to provide sufficient record for review
Moore v. County of Los Angeles (2008) 2008 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 581 (California Second District Court of Appeal, Division Three) [unpublished]. Plaintiff, an employee of the County, sued the County and several other employees on work-related claims. A jury found one of the individual defendants
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.