Search for: "Miller, in the Matter of"
Results 3221 - 3240
of 5,112
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jul 2020, 9:18 am
While the litigation itself has not progressed beyond the pleading stage, it did not need to for the appellate court to issue an important published opinion resolving the most significant legal issues presented as a matter of law. [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]
1 Jun 2017, 3:57 pm
Further, the action against the District fell within Code of Civil Procedure § 1094.5 and would thus have to proceed as an administrative mandamus action challenging the District’s final decision on the Authority to Construct based on the record made in Friends’ administrative appeal and matters judicially noticeable. [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 4:09 pm
• As an interpretive matter, according to the Court, “the [CESA] is tethered to the California Environmental Quality Act. [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 3:56 pm
“And all this science, I don’t understand It’s just my job, five days a week” – Elton John/Bernard Taupin, “Rocket Man” Having seen years of their lofty regional planning efforts come crashing back to Earth, San Diego government entities have had little to be thankful about so far this holiday season on the CEQA front. [read post]
20 Dec 2017, 3:59 pm
A fundamental prerequisite to a viable lawsuit is a plaintiff possessing standing to bring it, and in writ of mandate proceedings that generally means a person or entity actually possessing a beneficial interest in the legal relief being sought. [read post]
28 Sep 2021, 10:40 am
Central Delta claimed that the analysis was deficient because it failed to take into account another complementary provision, but the trial court and Court of Appeal disagreed, noting this was a matter of differing contract interpretations. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 9:51 am
City of San Juan Capistrano (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 961, the Fifth District Court of Appeal held as a matter of law that the City needed to comply with CEQA if it exercised its Elections Code § 9214(a) option of adopting the ordinance without alteration, rather than putting the measure on the ballot. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 10:20 am
The bottom line is that any way the onion was sliced, plaintiff’s CEQA action in this matter was filed too late. [read post]
10 Jan 2014, 4:10 pm
Rather, it raised the following two arguments that the exemptions were improper and that an EIR was required as a matter of law: (1) the Supreme Court’s decision in Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. [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]
10 Oct 2023, 8:40 am
” In the published portions of its opinion, discussed further below, the Court of Appeal held: (1) the EIR considers a reasonable range of alternatives; (2) the EIR improperly declines to analyze public transit impacts, but the error is not prejudicial; (3) the EIR does not need to analyze visual impacts, which are deemed not significant as a matter of law under Public Resources Code § 21099(d)(1); (4) the EIR is not required to adopt mitigation preserving… [read post]
22 May 2023, 10:58 am
While the Court agreed as a general matter that compensatory mitigation—i.e., compensating for an impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments (CEQA Guidelines, § 15370(a))—“may not be automatically excluded from consideration” when addressing impacts to historic resources, it held that Appellant had failed to show that such mitigation could, in the case before it, substantially lessen the project’s significant impacts. [read post]
15 May 2023, 11:09 am
” Permissive Intervention The Court likewise affirmed the trial court’s order denying permissive intervention, under which a nonparty with an interest in the matter in litigation or the success of the parties may be permitted to intervene if (1) proper procedures are followed, (2) the nonparty’s interest is direct and immediate, (3) intervention will not enlarge the issues in the litigation, and (4) the reasons supporting intervention outweigh any opposition by the… [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 11:39 am
On appeal, LRC argued: (1) the RSED’s conclusions that increased groundwater pumping was uncertain or unlikely conflicted with its finding that such pumping could have significant environmental effects; (2) the RSED failed to adequately describe or discuss the issue of potential adoption of the Subterranean Stream Delineations as a mitigation measure; and (3) the RSED’s finding that the Subterranean Stream Delineations were infeasible as a mitigation measure was erroneous as… [read post]
4 Aug 2014, 3:17 pm
As a preliminary matter, Petitioners’ state law CEQA claims were threatened with being permanently derailed on non-CEQA grounds when the Authority argued, for the first time after the appeal had been fully briefed and calendared for oral argument, that those claims were preempted under the federal Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (“ICCTA”; 49 U.S.C. [read post]
8 Oct 2013, 11:59 am
Given trial courts’ typically crowded calendars, and the fact that writ hearings consume more court time and resources than typical law-and-motion matters, the timely filing of a request for hearing is important to the orderly and expeditious prosecution of CEQA actions regardless of the status of record preparation. [read post]
1 Jul 2007, 11:06 pm
The district court granted summary judgment to Elmwood and Miller, holding as a matter of law that estoppel could not be applied to excuse thefailure to meet the numerical threshold.This case presents two questions in the context of an action under COBRA. [read post]
21 Jun 2021, 8:55 am
In a partially published unanimous opinion filed June 16, 2021, authored by a jurist who is also a noted CEQA expert (Acting Presiding Justice Ronald Robie), the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s judgment denying a writ petition challenging El Dorado County’s mitigated negative declaration (MND) for and approval of the Newtown Road Bridge at South Fork Weber Creek Replacement Project. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 11:39 am
On appeal, LRC argued: (1) the RSED’s conclusions that increased groundwater pumping was uncertain or unlikely conflicted with its finding that such pumping could have significant environmental effects; (2) the RSED failed to adequately describe or discuss the issue of potential adoption of the Subterranean Stream Delineations as a mitigation measure; and (3) the RSED’s finding that the Subterranean Stream Delineations were infeasible as a mitigation measure was erroneous as… [read post]
