The director of the state Department of Conservation has standing to sue a local agency over mining and reclamation plans approved by the local agency, the state Supreme Court has ruled unanimously. The ruling was a clear victory for state enforcement of the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA), which regulates all surface mines in California. >>read more

The Second District Court of Appeal has issued another ruling in the long-running controversy over the proposed demolition of a garden apartment complex in Venice. The latest ruling allowed both sides in the debate to claim victory. >>read more

A referendum of a $200 million agreement between the City of Rohnert Park and an Indian tribe planning to build a large casino has been blocked from the ballot. The First District Court of Appeal upheld a lower court ruling that the Rohnert Park City Council's approval of the agreement was an administrative act not subject to referendum. >>read more

Not often does a case already decided by the state Court of Appeal return to the same court for an interpretation of who won. However, the Fifth District Court of Appeal has issued a second ruling on a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) case from Merced County, making it perfectly clear that environmentalists won and the county lost. >>read more

An appellate court has ruled against a former San Diego Unified Port District commissioner who sued the district's former attorney over faulty legal advice. >>read more

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors has voted 3-2 to appeal a Superior Court judge's decision upholding stormwater regulations adopted by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board. >>read more

An appellate court has thrown out a mitigated negative declaration that the City of Los Angeles approved for a 21-lot subdivision in the Sunland area. The court ruled that project opponents had made a fair argument that the project may have a significant impact on wildlife and traffic. >>read more

Although it was overshadowed by higher-profile cases, a California water controversy decided in late June by the U.S. Supreme Court might have been the most closely watched case by California farmers, water districts and environmentalists. >>read more

A ruling in an endangered species case from Arizona demonstrates how sharply divided federal judges are regarding the legal protections afforded to rare animals and plants. In an extremely short opinion, a Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled 2-1 that the Army Corps of Engineers was not obliged to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regarding the impacts of two proposed housing developments on the ferruginous pygmy owl. >>read more

A limit on the amount of trash that can be discharged into the Los Angeles River has been upheld by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The court rejected a challenge filed by 22 cities in Los Angeles County to a limit established by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board. >>read more

The saga of public access to a beach adjacent to entertainment mogul David Geffen's house in Malibu has apparently concluded, with public access secure. >>read more

A redevelopment plan covering more than 10,000 acres in San Jose has been upheld by the Sixth District Court of Appeal. The court ruled that the city had proven that blight existed in the six sub-areas of the project. >>read more

Approval of a tentative parcel map does not prevent zoning changes from applying to the subdivision, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled. In a case from Orange County, the court ruled that the county could enforce provisions in a specific plan adopted after the county approved a four-lot parcel map for 9.2 acres within the specific plan area. >>read more

The City of Los Angeles was correct to revoke a building permit even though the permit holder had spent more than $200,000 on real estate and construction as a result of the city's advice and permit, the Second District Court of Appeal has ruled. >>read more