Search for: "Arthur F. Coon"
Results 301 - 320
of 472
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Sep 2012, 3:09 pm
The same appellate panel that decided the controversial Berkeley Hillside Preservation case (which is currently in the briefing stage of Supreme Court review) rendered another significant categorical exemption decision in its recently published opinion in Robinson v. [read post]
4 Mar 2025, 3:21 pm
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
15 Nov 2013, 11:53 am
In a recent decision extensively analyzing and applying CEQA’s rules on alternatives analysis, recirculation, and a petitioner’s burden to show agency error, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the Nevada County Superior Court’s judgment denying a writ petition challenging a commercial real estate project. [read post]
21 Sep 2017, 10:23 am
Preliminarily, the Court rejected real party Planned Parenthood’s argument that Respect Life lacked standing, observing that “[f]or a party to have standing to petition for a writ of mandate, the party must have a beneficial interest in the litigation. [read post]
21 Sep 2017, 10:23 am
Preliminarily, the Court rejected real party Planned Parenthood’s argument that Respect Life lacked standing, observing that “[f]or a party to have standing to petition for a writ of mandate, the party must have a beneficial interest in the litigation. [read post]
10 Oct 2023, 8:40 am
Applying CEQA’s “rule of reason” requiring an EIR to “set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15126.6(f)), the Court held petitioners failed to satisfy their burden to show the EIR’s alternatives “are manifestly unreasonable and . . . do not contribute to a reasonable range[.] [read post]
4 Aug 2014, 3:17 pm
While CEQA actions are statutorily designed as special proceedings with priority over other civil actions, and thus mandated to be heard and resolved expeditiously, when complex or controversial projects with dedicated opposition are involved this salutary statutory scheme sometimes goes off track. [read post]
8 Nov 2021, 9:43 am
In a partially published opinion filed on November 3, 2021, involving the CEQA review for a bed and breakfast/commercial event project proposed on property within a Yolo County agricultural zone, the Third District Court of Appeal (in a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Robie) reaffirmed the basic CEQA principle that a “full EIR” must be prepared whenever a project may have any significant environmental effect; it thus reversed the trial court’s judgment that had allowed a… [read post]
19 Aug 2019, 1:31 pm
Trades Council, AFL-CIO (9th Cir. 1994) 31 F.3d 800, 809.) [read post]
16 Jan 2018, 10:26 am
“[I]f the administrative proceeding [resulting in an action that aggrieves plaintiff] includes a right to appeal an allegedly improper action, a plaintiff must generally pursue that administrative appeal in order to exhaust his or her administrative remedies. [read post]
23 Dec 2019, 1:36 pm
Plaintiff challenged the EIR’s reliance on the 2035 General Plan’s new LOS standards as thresholds of significance, arguing that doing so avoided analysis of the significance of traffic impacts degrading to LOS F and avoided required study of alternatives and mitigation measures, and that the EIR’s less-than-significant conclusion thus lacked substantial evidence support. [read post]
3 Dec 2018, 4:08 pm
Key principles and takeaways from the published portion of the Court of Appeal’s opinion include: The statutory right to appeal in civil cases generally allows an appeal to be taken “[f]rom a judgment, except an interlocutory judgment’ and also from an order made after an appealable judgment. [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 3:16 pm
In a lengthy, partially published opinion filed January 12, 2018, the First District Court of Appeal (Division 3) partly affirmed, but in large part reversed, the trial court’s judgment granting a writ of mandate directing the City of Los Angeles to set aside its FEIR certification and approval of BNSF Railway Company’s (“BNSF”) project to construct a new intermodal railyard facility, near the Port of Los Angeles, to handle containerized cargo transported through the ports of… [read post]
11 May 2017, 8:18 am
When all was said and done, it was a case of “same wine, different bottle” for Defendant and Appellant San Mateo Community College District (“District”) after the First District Court of Appeal’s published May 5, 2017 decision, following remand from the California Supreme Court, in Friends of the College of San Mateo Gardens v. [read post]
16 Nov 2023, 12:24 pm
In a published opinion filed November 13, 2023, disposing of consolidated appeals, the Second District Court of Appeal (Div. 6) affirmed judgments denying writ petitions that sought to invalidate a Ventura County ordinance. [read post]
2 Mar 2015, 3:31 pm
In a decision filed January 29, and belatedly ordered published on February 18, 2015, the Fourth District Court of Appeal rejected numerous CEQA (and other) challenges to the City of San Diego’s regular, after-the-fact coastal and site development permits authorizing already-completed emergency storm drainage repair work as well as site revegetation at a hillside site in La Jolla. [read post]
20 Apr 2018, 6:04 pm
In an opinion filed March 20, and later certified for publication on April 12, 2018, the First District Court of Appeal (Division 3) affirmed a limited peremptory writ of mandate issued by the Contra Costa County Superior Court requiring the County to set aside an EIR and land use permit for Phillips 66 Company’s “Propane Recovery Project” at its oil refinery in the City of Rodeo, pending County’s correction of specified inadequacies in the EIR’s air quality analysis. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 11:39 am
In a published opinion filed September 28, 2017, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the Alameda County Superior Court’s judgment denying appellant Living Rivers Council’s (LRC) writ petition challenging the State Water Resources Control Board’s (the “SWRCB” or “Board”) approval of a policy designed to maintain instream flows in coastal streams north of San Francisco. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 9:51 am
In a case notable for its unique conception of “meaningful discretion” for purposes of triggering CEQA review, the Fifth District Court of Appeal has created a split in authority that will undoubtedly require Supreme Court review (or depublication) to resolve. [read post]
27 Jun 2023, 3:15 pm
In a published opinion filed June 13, 2023, the Second District Court of Appeal (Div. 8) affirmed the trial court’s judgment rejecting CEQA challenges to the City of Pomona’s (City) use of a statutory exemption – under Public Resources Code § 21083.3(a), (b) and CEQA Guidelines § 15183 – for its adoption of a zoning overlay district allowing commercial cannabis activities at specific locations within the City’s boundaries. [read post]
