Search for: "Arthur F. Coon"
Results 281 - 300
of 443
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 May 2016, 3:55 pm
In a brief – and somewhat odd – opinion filed April 22, and belatedly ordered partially published on May 20, 2016, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court judgment denying a petition for writ of mandate challenging a General Plan Amendment (GPA) adopted by the City of Palm Springs as categorically exempt from CEQA. [read post]
7 Jun 2012, 9:58 am
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
1 Oct 2018, 2:28 pm
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
22 Jan 2019, 11:38 am
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
1 Aug 2016, 11:25 am
In a 58-page published opinion filed June 30, 2016, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the Alameda County Superior Court’s judgment upholding the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) and Association of Bay Area Government’s (ABAG) EIR for and approval of “Plan Bay Area,” the agencies’ first Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) prepared pursuant to California’s landmark “Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of… [read post]
19 Oct 2017, 2:19 pm
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
26 Jul 2016, 10:52 am
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
25 Jan 2016, 11:56 am
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
30 May 2023, 5:02 pm
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
19 Aug 2019, 1:31 pm
Trades Council, AFL-CIO (9th Cir. 1994) 31 F.3d 800, 809.) [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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
26 Aug 2014, 10:59 am
In a lengthy, mostly-unpublished opinion filed on August 14, 2014, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the superior court’s judgment denying a writ petition challenging the Parkmerced Development Project. [read post]
