Search for: "Doe v. Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco" Results 21 - 40 of 111
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
“Bag It!” – Third Published CEQA “Bag Ban” Decision Upholds San Francisco’s Ordinance as Categorically Exempt While Slamming Plaintiff’s Arguments
10 Jan 2014, 4:10 pm by Arthur F. Coon
City and County of San Francisco (1st Dist., Div. 2, 2014) ____ Cal.App.4th ____, Case No. [read post]
CEQA Developments - http://www.ceqadevelopments.com
Discovery Rule Does Not Postpone Accrual of CEQA Cause of Action; Events Specified In CEQA Statute of Limitations Provide Constructive Notice of Project Approval or Commencement
26 Jul 2016, 10:52 am by Arthur F. Coon
In a short but significant published opinion filed July 19, 2016, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the San Francisco County Superior Court’s judgment of dismissal following the sustaining of demurrers (without leave to amend) to a CEQA action as time-barred. [read post]
CEQA Developments - http://www.ceqadevelopments.com
2014 CEQA ANNUAL REVIEW
21 Jan 2015, 10:59 am by Abbott & Kindermann
City and County of San Francisco (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1012. [read post]
Abbott & Kindermann Land Use Law Blog - http://blog.aklandlaw.com/
Second District Confirms Parking Is (Still) Not A CEQA Impact, Reverses Judgment That Found EIR For San Gabriel Mountains Wilderness Recreation And Preservation Project Deficient For Not Sufficiently Analyzing “Impact” Of Reducing Recreational Parking
23 Aug 2021, 8:52 am by Arthur F. Coon
City & County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656 for the principle that the “social inconvenience of having to hunt for scarce parking spaces is not an environmental [read post]
CEQA Developments - http://www.ceqadevelopments.com
Slapping Down An Anti-SLAPP: First District Holds Next-Door Neighbor Opponents Of Residential Renovation Project And Related CEQA Compliance In City’s Administrative Proceedings Were Properly Named As Real Parties In Interest In Project Proponent’s Subsequent Mandate Action Challenging City’s Project Denial
12 May 2023, 4:57 pm by Arthur F. Coon
City and County of San Francisco, et al. [read post]
CEQA Developments - http://www.ceqadevelopments.com
Plaintiff Seeks Freedom From Granfalloonery, Harassatoriness
23 May 2011, 5:00 am by Kevin
 City and County of San Francisco; San Francisco Superior Court; Dennis Herrera; Wayne Snodgrass; Andrew Gschwind; Harry Gower III; Robert Baysinger; Alisa Hollander Ella Yip; Adena Gilbert; Charlotte Woolard; Gail Dekreon; Ronald Albers; Vaughn Walker; George Bevan; Robert Dondero; Sandra Margulies; James Marchiano; A. [read post]
Lowering the Bar - http://www.loweringthebar.net/
Common Sense Ruling on Transsexual Birth Certificate Change
12 Apr 2009, 10:57 am
Superior Court of San Francisco City and County, 2009 Westlaw 962418 (April 10, 2009). [read post]
Leonard Link - http://newyorklawschool.typepad.com/leonardlink/
“For the Record”: Fourth District Holds CEQA’s “Mandatory” And “Broadly Inclusive” Administrative Record Statute Requires Lead Agency To Retain Documents Within Its Scope And Not Destroy Them Prior To Record Preparation
5 Aug 2020, 2:39 pm by Arthur F. Coon
  The Court found instructive San Francisco Tomorrow v. [read post]
CEQA Developments - http://www.ceqadevelopments.com
2015 CEQA 3rd QUARTER REVIEW
13 Oct 2015, 9:48 am by Abbott & Kindermann
(A135892; nonpublished opinion; San Mateo County Superior Court; CIV508656.) [read post]
Abbott & Kindermann Land Use Law Blog - http://blog.aklandlaw.com/
Apple's missing iPhone: First Amendment vs. lost property
25 Apr 2010, 8:24 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Apple's Cupertino headquarters is in Santa Clara County, about 40 miles south of San Francisco.In Apple's favor is a California statute on lost property: any person who finds lost property and knows who the owner is likely to be but "appropriates such property to his own use" is guilty of theft.On the flip side, the US Supreme Court in Bartnicki v. [read post]
IPBiz - http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/
2015 CEQA ANNUAL REVIEW
20 Jan 2016, 8:52 am by Abbott & Kindermann
(A135892; nonpublished opinion; San Mateo County Superior Court; CIV508656.) [read post]
Abbott & Kindermann Land Use Law Blog - http://blog.aklandlaw.com/
2016 CEQA ANNUAL REVIEW
10 Jan 2017, 8:56 am by Abbott & Kindermann
(G049691; 236 Cal.App.4th 1341; Orange County Superior Court; 30-2012-00593557.) [read post]
Abbott & Kindermann Land Use Law Blog - http://blog.aklandlaw.com/
2013 CEQA 2ND QUARTER REVIEW
16 Jul 2013, 8:55 am by Abbott & Kindermann
Superior Court); and mitigation requirements (City of San Diego v. [read post]
Abbott & Kindermann Land Use Law Blog - http://blog.aklandlaw.com/
Even After Koontz, The U.S. District Court Recognizes Existing Ninth Circuit and California Supreme Court Precedent Holding That Generally-Applied Legislative Exactions Are Not Governed By The Strict Takings Scrutiny Of Nollan/Dolan
17 Apr 2018, 11:03 pm by Glen C. Hansen
City and County of San Francisco (2002) 27 Cal.4th 643, 663-671; Santa Monica Beach, Ltd. v. [read post]
Abbott & Kindermann Land Use Law Blog - http://blog.aklandlaw.com/
First District Affirms Judgment Rejecting CEQA and General Plan Consistency Challenges to Napa County’s EIR for Syar Quarry Expansion Project, Addresses Significant Exhaustion and Land Use Issues
3 May 2021, 9:58 am by Arthur F. Coon
City and County of San Francisco (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 321, 329-330 (my April 5, 2019 post on which can be found here) in setting out the general CEQA principles and standards governing its review in a case challenging an EIR’s content and analysis. [read post]
CEQA Developments - http://www.ceqadevelopments.com
Fourth District Rejects Coastal Act/CEQA-Based Challenges To Commission’s Certification of San Diego Port Plan Amendment As Time-Barred For Failure To Join Indispensable Parties Within Limitations Period
3 Oct 2019, 3:51 pm by Arthur F. Coon
Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 169, 1977.) [read post]
CEQA Developments - http://www.ceqadevelopments.com
2014 CEQA 2nd QUARTER REVIEW
9 Jul 2014, 9:34 am by Abbott & Kindermann
City and County of San Francisco (2014) 222 Cal.App.4th 209. [read post]
Abbott & Kindermann Land Use Law Blog - http://blog.aklandlaw.com/
Sixth District Holds Project’s Consistency with General Plan Is Not a CEQA Issue, Upholds Trial Court’s Interlocutory Remand for County Board to Clarify Consistency Findings, and Affirms Judgment Denying Writ Petition Alleging General Plan and CEQA Challenges to Shopping Center Project
31 Aug 2017, 12:38 pm by Arthur F. Coon
City and County of San Francisco (2014) 229 Cal.App.4th 498, 515), it is well established that courts in such actions have inherent power in appropriate circumstances to remand to the agency for further proceedings prior to entering a final judgment. [read post]
CEQA Developments - http://www.ceqadevelopments.com
Sixth District Holds Project’s Consistency with General Plan Is Not a CEQA Issue, Upholds Trial Court’s Interlocutory Remand for County Board to Clarify Consistency Findings, and Affirms Judgment Denying Writ Petition Alleging General Plan and CEQA Challenges to Shopping Center Project
31 Aug 2017, 12:38 pm by Arthur F. Coon
City and County of San Francisco (2014) 229 Cal.App.4th 498, 515), it is well established that courts in such actions have inherent power in appropriate circumstances to remand to the agency for further proceedings prior to entering a final judgment. [read post]
CEQA Developments - http://www.ceqadevelopments.com
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Vincent de Fontbrune v. Alan Wofsy, Docket No. 19-16913
5 Oct 2022, 3:00 am
Box 2210 in San Francisco. [read post]
Frederic Borel - http://fredericborel.blogspot.ch/