fraudulent concealment

Dhital v. Nissan North America, Inc., S277568.

#23-22 Dhital v. Nissan North America, Inc., S277568. (A162817; 84 Cal.App.5th 828; Alameda County Superior Court; RG19009260.) Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed judgment in a civil action. The court ordered briefing deferred pending decision in Rattagan v. Uber Technologies, S272113 (#22-29)

Rattagan v. Uber Technologies, S272113.

#22-29 Rattagan v. Uber Technologies, S272113. (9th Circ. No. 20-16796; Northern District of California; No. 3:19-cv-01988-EMC.) Request under California Rules of Court, rule 8.548, that this court decide a question of California law presented in a matter pending in the United States Court of Appeals

GMSR’s Cindy Tobisman Appears Before The California Supreme Court

GMSR co-managing partner Cindy Tobisman appeared yesterday before the California Supreme Court to argue for the petitioner, Michael Rattagan, in a case against Uber Technologies, Inc.  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had asked the Court to decide whether, under California law, claims for fraudulent

GMSR secures reinstatement of client’s fraudulent inducement claims

Owners of a Nissan Sentra sued Nissan, alleging that Nissan fraudulently induced them to buy their car by concealing the fact that the transmissions in the Sentras were defective.  The trial court sustained Nissan’s demurrer based on the “economic loss rule,” which bars certain tort

Who We Serve

PUBLIC ENTITIES

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.

Read More
INSURERS

Where coverage may exist, GMSR represents insureds on appeal effectively and efficiently. Where it does not, the firm protects insurers’ right to deny claims.

Read More
BUSINESSES

GMSR offers corporate clients objective assessments on appeal, based on a deep understanding of the limitations and opportunities of appellate review.

Read More