Search for: "In the Matter of Estate of Miller"
Results 581 - 600
of 902
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
3 Jul 2013, 4:38 pm
Nothing says “battle royal” quite like pitting several of California’s heavyweight environmental laws against one another in a “winner-take-all” litigation brawl. [read post]
21 Mar 2024, 9:24 am
” Going on to its task of interpreting the CEQA Guidelines’ relevant text, which it did as a matter of law subject to independent review under the rules governing the interpretation of statutes, the Court found the text ambiguous as to whether ACE’s actually “compensate” for converted agricultural lands by “replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. [read post]
28 Jun 2017, 3:22 pm
They observe that the decision helpfully reviews the development and significance of the “ministerial/discretionary” distinction, and the “functional test” for distinguishing between the two types of approvals, and that the matter is of considerable public interest because that distinction demarcates which project approvals are, and which are not, subject to CEQA. [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]
12 Aug 2024, 10:42 am
The Sixth District Court of Appeal filed on July 24, and later certified for publication on August 6, 2024, its opinion in Center for Biological Diversity et al. v. [read post]
1 Apr 2020, 4:33 pm
Estoppel to Assert Statute of Limitations Adequately Alleged And Can’t Be Ruled Out On Facts Alleged As A Matter Of Law On Demurrer After reciting the familiar standards of review on [read post]
14 Sep 2009, 7:49 pm
Miller) the 4th DCA said "NO" [click here]. [read post]
11 Sep 2020, 7:24 am
Miller or any of the other Liskow & Lewis real estate team members listed on our Crisis Response & Preparedness homepage. [read post]
