For reprint rights or to purchase a copy of your Daily Journal photo, email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices or call 949-702-5390.

To buy more copies, call 866-531-1492 or email subscribe@dailyjournal.com
This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...
Daily appellate reports
Sign up for Daily Journal emails
    Filter by date
     to 
    Search by Case Name
    Search by Judge
    Search by Case Number
    Search by DJ Citation Number
    Search by Category
    Search by Court
Name Category Published
Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation v. Co. of El Dorado
County violated environmental protection laws by not preparing new environmental impact report before adopting new oak woodland management plan. 		Environmental Law Jan. 23, 2012
Sierra Club v. United States Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Protection Agency’s reliance on outdated and inaccurate data in approving state’s implementation is arbitrary and capricious thereby violating Clean Air Act. 		Environmental Law Jan. 23, 2012
Montana Sulphur and Chemical Co. v. EPA
EPA does not act arbitrarily or capriciously in enacting various regulations requiring continuous compliance with SO2 emissions limits for sulfur recovery plant. 		Environmental Law Jan. 20, 2012
Sierra Club v. California Dept. of Parks and Recreation
Petition to compel amendment of general development plan to ban off-highway vehicle activity on land tract is properly denied where plaintiff failed to allege ministerial duty. 		Environmental Law Jan. 10, 2012
The Flanders Foundation v. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
City is not required to consider environmental impacts from use of property as affordable housing where such use is not reasonably foreseeable. 		Environmental Law Jan. 5, 2012
Citizens for East Shore Parks v. California State Lands Commission (Chevron U.S.A. Inc.)
Additional mitigation measures are not required under public trust doctrine where State Lands Commission complied with CEQA and there were no changes in public trust use. 		Environmental Law Jan. 3, 2012
Northern Plains Resource Council Inc. v. The Surface Transportation Board
Surface Transportation Board fails to take requisite 'hard look' at environmental impacts prior to approving applications to build railroad line for hauling coal. 		Environmental Law Dec. 30, 2011
City of San Diego v. Board of Trustees of the California State University
Agency erroneously concludes that its inability to obtain funding from Legislature in mitigating project’s environmental effects is sufficient for CEQA compliance. 		Environmental Law Dec. 14, 2011
Ballona Wetlands Land Trust v. City of Los Angeles (Playa Capital Co. LLC)
Revised environmental impact report adequately discusses impacts of sea level rise due to global warming where response to comments suggested that inundation would not occur. 		Environmental Law Dec. 6, 2011
Montana Wilderness Association v. McAllister
U.S. Forest Service must consider increased volume of motorized recreational use in determining whether wilderness character of designated area has been maintained. 		Environmental Law Dec. 2, 2011
Southern California Gas Co. v. South Coast Air Quality Management District
Air quality management district's rule imposing monitoring requirements on natural gas distributor is reasonable because distributor derived gas from liquefied natural gas. 		Environmental Law Nov. 25, 2011
Pfeiffer v. City of Sunnyvale City Council (Palo Alto Medical Foundation)
Environmental impact report does not use incorrect traffic baseline for measuring project's traffic impacts where report considered existing and future conditions. 		Environmental Law Nov. 25, 2011
Friends of Shingle Springs Interchange Inc. v. County of El Dorado (Convenience Retailers LLC)
Doctrine of substantial compliance with corporate suspension statutes does not apply in CEQA and Planning and Zoning law challenges to avoid statutes of limitations. 		Environmental Law Nov. 23, 2011
Greater Yellowstone Coalition Inc. v. Servheen
Rule removing Yellowstone grizzly bear from list of threatened wildlife is improper due to unsupported determination that decline in food source would not threaten bear. 		Environmental Law Nov. 23, 2011
Rock Creek Alliance v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service properly relies on large-scale analysis in evaluating mine's impact on threatened trout where impacts were also considered in detail. 		Environmental Law Nov. 17, 2011
Southern California Gas Co. v. South Coast Air Quality Management District
Air quality management district's rule imposing monitoring requirements on natural gas distributor is reasonable because distributor derived gas from liquefied natural gas. 		Environmental Law Nov. 16, 2011
Southern California Gas Co. v. South Coast Air Quality Management District
Air quality management district's rule imposing monitoring requirements on natural gas distributor is reasonable because distributor derived gas from liquefied natural gas. 		Environmental Law Oct. 28, 2011
Russell Country Sportsmen v. U.S. Forest Service
Montana Wilderness Study Act of 1977 does not prohibit U.S. Forest Service from enhancing wilderness character of study area to preserve character against decline. 		Environmental Law Oct. 12, 2011
Ross v. California Coastal Commission (Malibu Bay Co.)
Five-foot buffer for dune environmentally sensitive habitat area adjacent to beachfront development does not conflict with city’s development standards. 		Environmental Law Oct. 11, 2011
Hillside Memorial Park and Mortuary v. Golden State Water Co.
Court must admit evidence, and if necessary, suggest physical solution for use of dewatered acreage if parties cannot resolve issue in motion to amend judgment. 		Environmental Law Sep. 27, 2011
Team Enterprises LLC v. Western Investment Real Estate Trust
Under CERCLA, manufacturer does not ‘arrange for disposal’ of hazardous substances where purpose of product is to recover hazardous substances, not disposal. 		Environmental Law Sep. 26, 2011
Madera Oversight Coalition Inc. v. City of Madera (Tesoro Viejo Inc.)
Environmental impact report that fails to discuss crucial information related to uncertainty of water supply for project is inadequate under California Environmental Quality Act. 		Environmental Law Sep. 14, 2011
Ross v. California Coastal Commission (Malibu Bay Co.)
Five-foot buffer for dune environmentally sensitive habitat area adjacent to beachfront development does not conflict with city’s development standards. 		Environmental Law Sep. 12, 2011
Schenck v. County of Sonoma (Liquid Investments Inc.)
Failure to provide notice to agency regarding development project within its jurisdiction is not prejudicial where notice would not have impact on decision making process. 		Environmental Law Aug. 29, 2011
Barnes v. U.S. Dept. of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration must consider indirect environmental impact of increased demand at airport resulting from construction of additional runway. 		Environmental Law Aug. 26, 2011
Center for Environmental Law and Policy v. United States Bureau of Reclamation
State agency's environmental assessment for proposed incremental drawdown of water is proper although part of cumulative effects analysis was perfunctory. 		Environmental Law Aug. 22, 2011
In Defense of Animals v. U.S. Dept. of the Interior
Interlocutory appeal of denial of preliminary injunction, which sought to prevent roundup of wild horses, is rendered moot because roundup already took place. 		Environmental Law Aug. 16, 2011
Voices of the Wetlands v. State Water Resources Control Board (Duke Energy Moss Landing LLC)
State Regional Water Board uses proper cost-benefit analysis in determining whether thermal power plant used best technology available to minimize environmental impacts. 		Environmental Law Aug. 16, 2011
Hinds Investments L.P. v. Angioli
Liability for contributing to disposal of hazardous waste under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act requires active involvement or control over disposal. 		Environmental Law Aug. 2, 2011
Team Enterprises LLC v. Western Investment Real Estate Trust
Under CERCLA, manufacturer does not ‘arrange for disposal’ of hazardous substances where purpose of product is to recover hazardous substances, not disposal. 		Environmental Law Jul. 27, 2011
By using our website, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. You can learn more about how we use cookies by reviewing our Privacy Policy here.