Search for: "Arthur F. Coon"
Results 361 - 380
of 443
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Aug 2017, 10:14 am
In a published decision filed August 8, 2017, the Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial Court’s judgment dismissing a CEQA action brought by two individuals (“Appellants”) against the Mt. [read post]
24 Apr 2017, 2:32 pm
On April 21, 2017, the First District Court of Appeal filed a 22-page published opinion providing significant guidance and analysis concerning the critical, but sometimes elusive, distinction between “discretionary” project approvals that are subject to CEQA and “ministerial” ones that are exempt from it. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 9:51 am
In a case notable for its unique conception of “meaningful discretion” for purposes of triggering CEQA review, the Fifth District Court of Appeal has created a split in authority that will undoubtedly require Supreme Court review (or depublication) to resolve. [read post]
22 Jan 2018, 3:16 pm
In a lengthy, partially published opinion filed January 12, 2018, the First District Court of Appeal (Division 3) partly affirmed, but in large part reversed, the trial court’s judgment granting a writ of mandate directing the City of Los Angeles to set aside its FEIR certification and approval of BNSF Railway Company’s (“BNSF”) project to construct a new intermodal railyard facility, near the Port of Los Angeles, to handle containerized cargo transported through the ports of… [read post]
28 Jun 2017, 3:22 pm
On June 16, 2017 – without seeking either rehearing in the First District Court of Appeal or review by the Supreme Court – losing appellants Sierra Club and Center for Biological Diversity filed a letter asking the Supreme Court to depublish the First District’s (Division 1) recent opinion in Sierra Club v. [read post]
10 Jan 2014, 4:10 pm
Plaintiff Save the Plastic Bag Coalition (Coalition) lost a third consecutive published appellate decision in its litigation campaign to require EIRs for virtually all local ordinances that ban or restrict the use of single-use plastic bags in favor of alternatives deemed environmentally superior. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 10:24 am
Just a few updates/items of possible interest as we head toward the end of this short (but very cold and wet) month: Regulatory Developments The close of OPR’s public comment period on its Discussion Draft of the CEQA Climate Change Advisory is March 15, 2019, at 5:00 p.m. [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]
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 May 2021, 10:27 am
In an opinion filed April 23, and later certified for publication on May 13, 2021, the Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed in part an order denying an anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) motion, and held that a malicious prosecution action could proceed against losing CEQA plaintiffs who had unsuccessfully challenged a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), but not against their attorneys. [read post]
23 Nov 2022, 3:34 pm
“We didn’t start the fire…. [read post]
3 Jan 2023, 4:25 pm
While CEQA is a complicated area of law, often criticized as a “plaintiff’s sandbox,” CEQA litigation is not a “free-for-all” immune from malicious prosecution actions when it is unsuccessfully pursued with malice and without probable cause. [read post]
28 Sep 2021, 10:40 am
Against the backdrop of another severe drought, water supply and impact issues continue to be points of contention for water agencies, water users, conservation groups, and the state. [read post]
1 Aug 2018, 3:39 pm
In an opinion filed June 28, and later ordered modified and published on July 27, 2018, the Second District Court of Appeal (Div. 6) affirmed the trial court’s $21,160.46 cost award in favor of a prevailing party public agency for costs associated with preparing the administrative record in a CEQA case, despite petitioner’s election to prepare the record, where the petitioner had unreasonably delayed and the agency acted reasonably. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 2:26 pm
On May 30, 2014, the Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District (Division 4) filed its order denying rehearing and granting the requests of real party in interest AT&T, Verizon, Remy Moose Manley and others to publish its April 30 opinion in San Francisco Beautiful, et al. v. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 9:24 am
“You may say I’m a dreamer. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 2:40 pm
The Court noted it “has no obligation to perfect an inadequate record” and that “the general rule is that “[f]ailure to provide an adequate record concerning an issue challenged on appeal requires that the issue be resolved against the appellant. [read post]
20 Aug 2018, 11:14 am
It also credited fact-based public commentary and observations as showing potentially significant traffic impacts, and observed that the Initial Study itself confirmed a Project-caused change in traffic LOS from E to F, which adverse impact was not rendered insignificant under CEQA or “trumped” by City’s adopted threshold of significance to that effect. [read post]
12 May 2015, 12:51 pm
The Court of Appeal’s Application Of The “Fair Argument” Test The Court of Appeal observed that CEQA provides no “ironclad definition” of what constitutes a significant effect and that “[i]f there is disagreement among expert opinion supported by facts …. the Lead Agency shall treat the effect as significant and shall prepare an EIR” (citing 14 Cal. [read post]
2 May 2023, 11:45 am
Dept. of Commerce (9th Cir. 2017) 878 F.3d 725, had been held too speculative to analyze. [read post]
