<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Law Offices of Martin Buchanan</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.martinbuchanan.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.martinbuchanan.com</link>
	<description>San Diego Appeal Lawyer Martin Buchanan</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2012 19:03:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Monzon v. Southern California Regional Railroad Authority</title>
		<link>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/monzon-v-southern-california-regional-railroad-authority/</link>
		<comments>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/monzon-v-southern-california-regional-railroad-authority/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 20:15:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firm News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.martinbuchanan.com/?p=143</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Martin won a reversal of a summary judgment ruling against his clients in a case against Metrolink, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority, and Union Pacific Railway.  Martin&#8217;s clients were the survivors of a woman who was killed when she was hit by a train inside a train tunnel.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Martin won a reversal of a summary judgment ruling against his clients in a case against Metrolink, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority, and Union Pacific Railway.  Martin&#8217;s clients were the survivors of a woman who was killed when she was hit by a train inside a train tunnel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/monzon-v-southern-california-regional-railroad-authority/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>2012 California Lawyer Attorney of the Year</title>
		<link>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/front/2012-california-lawyer-attorney-of-the-year/</link>
		<comments>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/front/2012-california-lawyer-attorney-of-the-year/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 03:07:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Firm News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Front Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.martinbuchanan.com/?p=140</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[California Lawyer magazine has awarded Martin one of its prestigious California Lawyer Attorneys of the Year (CLAY) award.  The award recognizes attorneys &#8220;whose achievements have made a profound impact on the law.&#8221;  Martin was profiled in the March 2012 issue as one of two CLAY recipients in the Appellate Law category.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>California Lawyer</em> magazine has awarded Martin one of its prestigious California Lawyer Attorneys of the Year (CLAY) award.  The award recognizes attorneys &#8220;whose achievements have made a profound impact on the law.&#8221;  Martin was profiled in the March 2012 issue as one of two CLAY recipients in the Appellate Law category.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/front/2012-california-lawyer-attorney-of-the-year/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Credit/Debit Card Tying Cases</title>
		<link>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/creditdebit-card-tying-cases/</link>
		<comments>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/creditdebit-card-tying-cases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 22:57:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firm News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.martinbuchanan.com/?p=137</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On January 9, 2012, Martin won a reversal of a judgment approving a $31 million class action settlement against Visa and MasterCard.  Martin represented a named plaintiff in another class action against Visa and MasterCard whose claims were released as part of the settlement.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On January 9, 2012, Martin won a reversal of a judgment approving a $31 million class action settlement against Visa and MasterCard.  Martin represented a named plaintiff in another class action against Visa and MasterCard whose claims were released as part of the settlement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/creditdebit-card-tying-cases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>2011 Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America</title>
		<link>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/firm-news/2011-lawdragon-500-leading-lawyers-in-america/</link>
		<comments>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/firm-news/2011-lawdragon-500-leading-lawyers-in-america/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Dec 2011 10:48:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Firm News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.martinbuchanan.com/?p=136</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Martin has been selected as one of the 2011 Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America.  He is the only appellate lawyer on the list with offices outside Washington, D.C.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Martin has been selected as one of the 2011 Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America.  He is the only appellate lawyer on the list with offices outside Washington, D.C.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/firm-news/2011-lawdragon-500-leading-lawyers-in-america/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chapman v. Tolo</title>
		<link>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/chapman-v-tolo/</link>
		<comments>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/chapman-v-tolo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 16:12:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firm News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.martinbuchanan.com/?p=134</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On December 20, 2011, the Court of Appeal affirmed a $1.8 million judgment in favor of Martin&#8217;s client in a negligence case arising from a car accident.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On December 20, 2011, the Court of Appeal affirmed a $1.8 million judgment in favor of Martin&#8217;s client in a negligence case arising from a car accident.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/chapman-v-tolo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Recorder 2011 Attorneys of the Year</title>
		<link>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/firm-news/the-recorder-2011-attorneys-of-the-year/</link>
		<comments>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/firm-news/the-recorder-2011-attorneys-of-the-year/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 22:53:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Firm News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.martinbuchanan.com/?p=129</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Recorder has named Martin Buchanan as one of its 2011 Attorneys of the Year.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>The Recorder </em>has named Martin Buchanan as one of its 2011 Attorneys of the Year.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/firm-news/the-recorder-2011-attorneys-of-the-year/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Montz v. Pilgrim Films &amp; Television, Inc.</title>
		<link>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/certiorari/montz-v-pilgrim-films-television-inc/</link>
		<comments>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/certiorari/montz-v-pilgrim-films-television-inc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2011 22:04:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Firm News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Petitions for Writ of Certiorari]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.martinbuchanan.com/?p=126</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On November 7, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to review an en banc  decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of Martin&#8217;s clients in Montz v. Pilgrim Films &#38; Television, Inc. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On November 7, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to review an en banc  decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of Martin&#8217;s clients in <em>Montz v. Pilgrim Films &amp; Television, Inc</em>.<em> </em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/certiorari/montz-v-pilgrim-films-television-inc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rejai v. Riazati</title>
		<link>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/rejai-v-riazati/</link>
		<comments>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/rejai-v-riazati/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011 21:10:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firm News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.martinbuchanan.com/?p=122</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On October 21, 2011, Martin won a pro bono appeal affirming the renewal of his client&#8217;s restraining order against an ex-boyfriend.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On October 21, 2011, Martin won a pro bono appeal affirming the renewal of his client&#8217;s restraining order against an ex-boyfriend.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/rejai-v-riazati/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Daily Journal Top 100 California Lawyers</title>
		<link>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/front/daily-journal-top-100-california-lawyers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/front/daily-journal-top-100-california-lawyers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 17:05:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Firm News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Front Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.martinbuchanan.com/?p=119</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Daily Journal has named Martin Buchanan as one of the Top 100 Lawyers in California for 2011.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <em>Daily Journal</em> has named Martin Buchanan as one of the Top 100 Lawyers in California for 2011.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/front/daily-journal-top-100-california-lawyers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Girardi &amp; Keese v. City of Los Angeles</title>
		<link>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/girardi-keese-v-city-of-los-angeles/</link>
		<comments>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/girardi-keese-v-city-of-los-angeles/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 21:54:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martin Buchanan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firm News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.martinbuchanan.com/?p=113</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On September 14, 2011, Martin won a reversal of an order directing a plaintiffs&#8217; law firm to pay the City&#8217;s legal fees for defending a case that was dismissed on summary judgment.  The Court of Appeal found that the trial court had erred in ruling that the law firm did not maintain the action in good [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On September 14, 2011, Martin won a reversal of an order directing a plaintiffs&#8217; law firm to pay the City&#8217;s legal fees for defending a case that was dismissed on summary judgment.  The Court of Appeal found that the trial court had erred in ruling that the law firm did not maintain the action in good faith or with reasonable cause.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.martinbuchanan.com/appeals/girardi-keese-v-city-of-los-angeles/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

