Gregory A. Mase

Senior Counsel  |   Oakland/East Bay

Practice Group

Gregory A. Mase is Senior Counsel at the Firm's Oakland/East Bay office and the co-chair of our Appellate Practice Group. He has focused on civil appellate law for more than twenty years, handling appeals in the state and federal courts of California. He has argued successfully before the California State Appellate Courts and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.  Mr. Mase combines his appellate practice with extensive trial court experience that spans over twenty-six years, mainly preparing dispositive motions such as demurrers and motions for summary judgment.

Mr. Mase finds that his clients receive increased efficiency when Ericksen Arbuthnot handles its lower court cases through to conclusion on appeal.  Following is a list of some of Mr. Mase’s appellate victories where Ericksen Arbuthnot represented its clients throughout the litigation process:

  • Linton v. County of Contra Costa (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 628 (certified for partial publication) (First Appellate District affirmed trial court’s order denying plaintiff’s motion for fees and costs of more than $1,000,000 in alleged discrimination case under Disabled Persons Act and Unruh Civil Rights Act);
  • Levi v. Morrison & Foerster, LLP, 2018 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 7421 (Third Appellate District affirmed trial court’s order dismissing plaintiff’s complaint with prejudice and imposing sanctions on plaintiff for frivolous motion on appeal in alleged fraud case);
  • County of Sacramento v. Valley Healthcare Sys. (2017) 2017 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 8849 (Third Appellate District affirmed trial court’s grant of summary judgment on express indemnity claim for $2,000,000, including $500,000 in attorney’s fees);
  • 1918 Lakeshore Tenants Union v. Lakeshore Apartments LP (2017) 2017 WL 1210020 (unpublished) (First Appellate District reversed and remanded trial court’s order denying the defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion in landlord-tenant dispute);
  • Glassner v. Smith (2015) 2015 WL 2127065 (unpublished) (First Appellate District reversed trial court’s order denying anti-SLAPP motion as to four clients and affirmed the trial court’s order granting the anti-SLAPP motion as to the fifth client; trial court awarded defendants over $248,000 on remand);
  • Naser v. Lakeridge (2014) (certified for partial publication) 2014 WL 2922405 (First Appellate District affirmed trial court’s order granting summary judgment and awarding deposition subpoena costs in favor of defendant health club);
  • Good v. Miller (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 472 (published) (Third Appellate District dismissed opponent’s defective appeal from trial court’s order issuing terminating sanctions for abuse of discovery process);
  • Ramirez v. On Assignment (2013) 2013 WL 443423 (Second Appellate District affirmed trial court’s order granting motion for summary judgment on behalf of nurse in wrongful death case);
  • Medrano v. Flagstar Bank FSB (2012) 704 F.3d 661 (9th Cir.) (published) (Ninth Circuit affirmed district court’s order dismissing claims against real estate agents); and
  • Sudol v. Sage-DeLuca Associates (2012) C071003 (Third Appellate District issued Palma notice indicating its intent to issue a peremptory writ of mandate in the first instance reversing the trial court’s order denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment).


  • University of California, Hastings College of Law, J.D.
  • University of California, Berkeley, B.A.
  • California
  • U.S. Court of Appeal, 9th Circuit