Search for: "Arthur F. Coon"
Results 201 - 220
of 448
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jan 2018, 2:17 pm
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
8 Jan 2018, 4:31 pm
As we move into a brand new year of tracking CEQA developments, it seems like an appropriate time to survey and briefly recap some of the many significant published case law developments that occurred over the past year. [read post]
20 Dec 2017, 3:59 pm
., “Standing Against Environmental Injustice: Some Thoughts On Facing The Need For CEQA Litigation Reform,” by Arthur F. [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 3:26 pm
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
7 Dec 2017, 3:19 pm
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 12:44 pm
In a lengthy, partially published opinion filed November 21, 2017, the Fifth District Court of Appeal addressed four CEQA challenges asserted by plaintiffs and appellants (“AIR”) to the sufficiency of Kern County’s 2014 Final EIR for Real Parties’ (“Alon Energy”) project to modify an existing Bakersfield oil refinery. [read post]
22 Nov 2017, 11:35 am
When it comes to CEQA cases, some courts don’t seem to know when to stop beating a dead horse. [read post]
17 Nov 2017, 2:26 pm
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 5:22 pm
In 15-page opinion filed on September 15, and later certified for publication on October 16, 2017, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s judgment denying a writ petition challenging the Judicial Council of California’s (“Judicial Council”) EIR for its project to relocate and consolidate El Dorado County Superior Court operations into a single new building on the outskirts of Placerville. [read post]
19 Oct 2017, 2:19 pm
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
19 Oct 2017, 2:19 pm
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
17 Oct 2017, 9:56 am
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
17 Oct 2017, 9:56 am
Please contact Arthur F. [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]
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]
25 Sep 2017, 4:09 pm
In a published opinion filed September 19, 2017, the First District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s denial of a writ petition challenging defendant California Department of Pesticide Regulation’s (“Department”) approval of label amendments for two pesticides containing an active ingredient toxic to honeybees. [read post]
25 Sep 2017, 4:09 pm
In a published opinion filed September 19, 2017, the First District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s denial of a writ petition challenging defendant California Department of Pesticide Regulation’s (“Department”) approval of label amendments for two pesticides containing an active ingredient toxic to honeybees. [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]
19 Sep 2017, 3:13 pm
AB 890 (Medina – D), recently sent to Governor Brown for action by October 15, seeks to amend Government Code § 65867.5 and to add §§ 65363 and 65850.10 to prevent development agreements and certain types of land use planning and zoning legislation from being enacted by local voter-sponsored land use initiatives. [read post]
