Two years ago, an appellate panel ruled that the controversial housing proposal should have been processed under SB 35 -- the first major ruling. Now the court has ruled that a local judge had the authority to rule on Housing Accountability Act violations as well.

In a very strongly worded opinion, a Los Angeles appellate court shot down all the neighbors' arguments about an eldercare facility in Pacific Palisades -- and, in the process, reiterated that the role of the courts is to defer to the city’s judgment when substantial evidence exists and not "re-weigh the evidence". 

History would suggest that the answer is no. It's more likely that the Legislature will punch a couple of holes in the law and plaintiffs' lawyers will continue to figure out how to get around the holes.

An EIR from Grass Valley failed because the project would put multifamily units 170 feet from a state highway and the city didn't analyze the air pollution impact.

In an indication of the increasingly acrimonious nature of land-use disputes, a prominent San Diego land-use lobbyist and a community activist opposed to a church project sued each other for libel. The activist then filed an anti-SLAPP suit -- which was not successful. Now the lobbyist can move forward with the libel suit.

26-foot statue in the middle of a street in Palm Springs also violates the state's Motor Vehicle Code, an appellate ocurt rules.

Final ruling in People's Park case turns around on one issue and softens the argument on the other -- but prompts Newsom to vow CEQA reform.

In an acrimonious case about water rights, an appellate court strikes down the "Weed Nine's" malicious prosecution argument.

An Arcadia homeowner wanted to stop the expansion of his neighbor's home. He took it to the Court of Appeal -- but he wasn't specific enough in his original comments before the city's planning commission and city council.