Legal Digest

A San Diego historical society's lawsuit over a housing development on a site the society considered historical has been dismissed by the Fourth District Court of Appeal. The appellate panel upheld a lower court, which dismissed the case because the historical society had neither submitted the administrative record nor filed an opening brief. >>read more

A proposed hotel that is consistent with a redevelopment plan, which itself has been the subject of a program environmental impact report, does not require a new environmental study, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled. >>read more

The Pleasant Hill Redevelopment Agency's subsidies for a housing project did not make the project a "public work" that required the payment of prevailing wages to workers, the First District Court of Appeal has ruled. >>read more

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has dealt another blow to housing developers who sued the City of Fresno, an individual city councilman and twelve citizens because the city refused to approve tax-exempt bonds for an apartment project. >>read more

Proposed alterations to the inside of a private residence are not subject to California Environmental Quality Act review, even if the alterations would affect a historic structure, the First District Court of Appeal has ruled. >>read more

The First District Court of Appeal has rejected a property owner's claim that an Alameda County ballot measure rendered any application for development futile and, therefore, effected an unconstitutional taking. >>read more

A nonprofit corporation created by the City of San Diego to carry out downtown redevelopment may not meet in closed session with legal counsel for the city's redevelopment agency, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled. >>read more

A 2001 U.S. Supreme Court decision limiting the Army Corps of Engineers' regulatory authority under the Clean Water Act does not limit the Corps' jurisdiction over wetlands adjacent to "waters of the United States," the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled. >>read more

Southern California "lifestyle" center developer Rick Caruso won two recent rounds against the owners of traditional shopping malls. The rulings, one published and the other unpublished, both came from the Second District Court of Appeal. >>read more

An attempt to certify the validity of parcels in Ventura County created during the 1940s has been rejected by the Second District Court of Appeal. The court found that the land in question was subdivided illegally during the 1940s, and the county has no obligation to recognize the subdivision now. >>read more

A water district may enter into a reimbursement agreement with a developer for the construction of oversized infrastructure to support anticipated growth, the state Attorney General's Office has concluded. >>read more

In an unusual case from the wilds of Plumas County, the Third District Court of Appeal has rejected the claims of a property owner who argued that a county ordinance allowing a neighbor's livestock to graze on his land amounted to an unconstitutional taking. >>read more

In a decision similar to other recent rulings, an appellate court has rejected an environmental impact report for a proposed business park in Santa Clarita because the project EIR's discussion of water sources was inadequate. >>read more

El Dorado County continues to be the center of litigation over laws involving mining. In the latest case, the Third District Court of Appeal ruled that a mine operator may not sue the State Mining and Geology Board, its members and two employees for allegedly violating the miner's civil rights. >>read more