Robin Meadow - Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP

Robin Meadow

Listed in Best Lawyers since 2006
Phone: 310-859-7811

Robin Meadow is a frequent go-to guy when other GMSR lawyers confront a legal issue that needs a vigorous analytical workout. Robin is in his element dissecting the law and shaping appellate strategy. He combines a degree of excitement about the law more often seen in new lawyers with a depth and breadth of expertise honed in over 40 years of practice. Robin joined GMSR as a partner in 1994, after 23 years as a trial and appellate lawyer in a major commercial firm. He brought to GMSR not only deep experience in many areas of commercial law, but also a practical understanding of the trial courts that is rare in the appellate bar. He has, for example, successfully defended lender liability actions before both juries and appellate courts. Robin has continued to focus his practice on business disputes involving such areas as real estate, title insurance, partnerships, professional malpractice and intellectual property, and in all of these areas his appellate work has resulted in groundbreaking decisions. He also has substantial expertise in family and healthcare law.

Robin’s practice reflects his longstanding interest in technology. A pioneer in the use of electronic records and briefs, Robin co-authored the Second District Court of Appeal’s protocol for electronic briefs (since adopted by other districts), and he filed the first electronic brief ever accepted by that court. His leadership in technological matters has helped keep GMSR at the forefront of appellate firms in this rapidly-evolving area. Just as he does within the firm, Robin has shared his expertise with the legal community, through countless articles and lectures on business litigation and appellate law.

Robin has been a member of the California Academy of Appellate Lawyers since 1988, serving as its president in 2005-2006, and is a Fellow of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers. He is listed in “The Best Lawyers in America”; is named in Chambers and Partners USA ( as a Band 1 Appellate Litigator; and was named one of the “Top 100 Southern California Super Lawyers” for 2006 and 2012 through 2016.

In addition, throughout his career Robin has been active in the organized bar and community organizations. Among many other activities, he served as the president of the Los Angeles County Bar Association (2003-2004); as the chair of many Association committees, including its Appellate Courts Committee (2001-2003); as the president of Public Counsel (the nation’s largest pro bono legal services organization); and as the president of Hathaway Children and Family Services (a nationally-recognized multi-service organization focusing on vulnerable children and their families). He has also served for many years on the Board of Directors of the ACLU Foundation of Southern California.

Robin is a graduate of the Boalt Hall School of Law (J.D. 1971, Order of the Coif) and the University of California, Berkeley (1968).

When he isn’t practicing law, Robin enjoys reading history and playing bass guitar in a rock band.

University of California BerkeleyAB 1968University of California BerkeleyJ.D. 1971
State Bar of California Board of Legal SpecializationCalifornia Academy of Appellate LawyersLos Angeles County Bar Association: Appellate Courts CommitteeAmerican Bar Association: Litigation Section; Appellate Advocacy Committee of the Tort Trial and Insurance Practice Section California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District Mediation Program Steering CommitteeCalifornia Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District Mediation ProgramChancery Club of Los Angeles Friends of the Los Angeles County Law LibraryNational Board of Appellate Lawyers, National Board of Trial Advocacy

Case History

Ginsberg v. Gamson (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 873 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Eight) [published] — Court of Appeal reverses and directs entry of judgment for GMSR’s client in lease dispute, holding that lease was not perpetual
Greenspan v. LADT, LLC (2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 1413 (Greenspan I) (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division One) [published] — In an arbitration arising out of a real estate contract, GMSR’s client won an $8 million award. The defendants sought to vacate it on grounds that the award decided an unsubmitted issue, that the award was not rationally related to the parties’ contract, that the award was untimely, and that the arbitrator should have recused himself for potential bias. The Court of Appeal rejected all of these arguments. It emphasized the arbitrator’s power under the JAMS rules governing the arbitration to interpret the parties’ underlying contract, their arbitration agreement and the arbitration rules they agreed to follow. On the recusal question, it found that the basis of the bias claim—a lawsuit the defendants had filed against the arbitrator because of his conduct in another arbitration—simply represented judge-shopping and could not support recusal. The opinion is noteworthy for its extensive collection and detailed discussion of non-California authorities relevant to these points.
Jasmine Networks, Inc v. Superior Court (2009) 180 Cal.App.4th 980 (California Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District) [published] — The trial court dismissed a trade secrets misappropriation suit on the eve of trial, concluding that the plaintiff lost standing to pursue its claims when it sold what was left of the trade secrets to a third party but expressly retained its interest in the litigation. GMSR petitioned for a writ of mandate on behalf of the plaintiff. The petition argued that neither the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act nor any other authority requires a plaintiff to maintain ownership of its misappropriated trade secrets in order to recover for damages already incurred. The Court of Appeal agreed in a published opinion, holding that there is no “current ownership” requirement and ordering the trial court to reinstate the plaintiff’s suit.   
Siebel v. Mittlesteadt (2007) 41 Cal.4th 735 (California Supreme Court)
An employee of Siebel Systs sued the head of the company, GMSR's client Tom Siebel, for sexual discrimination and wrongful termination. Through motions and a jury trial, he prevailed on every claim. While the plaintiff's appeal from the resulting judgment was pending, Siebel agreed to settle with her. Under the settlement agreement, the plaintiff paid the entirety of the cost judgment Siebel had recovered and dismissed her appeal, and she and Siebel exchanged mutual releases. However, the release did not extend to the plaintiff's lawyers; Siebel expressly reserved his right to sue them for malicious prosecution. This appeal arose from Siebel's malicious prosecution action against the lawyers. It raised a novel question concerning one of the requirements of a malicious prosecution suit: The malicious prosecution plaintiff must have obtained a "favorable termination" of the underlying case. In most cases, a settlement of the underlying case before judgment precludes a finding of favorable termination. However, there is virtually no law on whether or how that rule applies when the malicious prosecution plaintiff actually won the underlying case before settling. The Supreme Court addressed that question here, holding that "a post-judgment settlement constitutes a favorable termination when the malicious prosecution plaintiff received a favorable judgment in the underlying action, and settled without giving up any portion of the judgment in his favor."
Sargent Fletcher, Inc. v. Able Corp. (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1658 (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Four) [published] — The Court of Appeal affirmed a defense judgment for a client accused of stealing trade secrets, who alleged independent development of the disputed product. In a first-impression decision, the Court held that a defendant's allegation of reverse engineering does not cause the burden of proof to shift; rather, the plaintiff must prove lack of independent development.

Office Location

5900 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90036
United States

Lawyer of the Year Awards

2013 Lawyer of the Year in Appellate Practice of the Los Angeles Metro Area
Robin Meadow has earned a Lawyer of the Year award for 2013!

Practice Areas

Appellate Practice (Arbitration, Family Law Appeals, Litigation)

Other Information

Gender: Male