Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
21-454
|
Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Protection Agency's attempt to assert jurisdiction over private property's wetlands through the Clean Water Act failed because it required clearer congressional language to do so. |
Environmental Law |
|
S. Alito | May 26, 2023 |
A163810
|
Save Berkeley's Neighborhoods v. Regents of the University of California
Trial court's orders suspending UC Berkeley student enrollment increases were unenforceable in light of Senate Bill 118's amendments to CEQA. |
Environmental Law |
|
S. Margulies | May 23, 2023 |
21-16555
|
GP Vincent II v. The Estate of Beard
Claim preclusion did not bar CERCLA claims regarding property that was the subject of previous environmental litigation. |
Environmental Law |
|
M. Hawkins | May 18, 2023 |
20-15654
|
Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service did not properly justify its choice to designate a northern mountain region in Arizona as an unoccupied critical habitat for the endangered jaguar. |
Environmental Law |
|
D. Forrest | May 18, 2023 |
21-35504
|
Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Petrick
Healthy Forests Restoration Act does not require that a proposed forest project border an at-risk community when a community wildfire protection plan is in place that defines the wildland-urban interface. |
Environmental Law |
|
R. Nelson | May 17, 2023 |
H049555
|
Preservation Action Council of San Jose v. City of San Jose
San Jose's environmental impact report for high-rise office tower project in downtown plaza was sufficient because its proposed mitigation measures to protect historical bank were feasible. |
Environmental Law |
|
A. Danner | May 12, 2023 |
C071785
|
Modification: County of Butte v. Dept. of Water Resources
California's environmental impact report for licensed hydropower facilities was sufficient because whether climate change necessitated project operation changes was too uncertain to evaluate. |
Environmental Law |
|
S. Boulware Eurie | May 2, 2023 |
19-35921
|
Murphy Co. v. Biden
President Obama's proclamation expanding Oregon's Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument was consistent with expansive discretionary power granted by the Oregon and California Railroad and Coos Bay Wagon Road Grant Lands Act. |
Environmental Law |
|
M. McKeown | Apr. 25, 2023 |
21-16278
|
California Restaurant Association v. City of Berkeley
Despite not directly regulating natural gas appliances, ordinance prohibiting installing natural gas infrastructure in new buildings was expressly preempted as regulation on the quantity of gas consumed by covered appliances. |
Environmental Law |
|
P. Bumatay | Apr. 18, 2023 |
C093513
|
Modification: Environmental Law Foundation v. State Water Resources Control Bd.
State Water Board's adoption of order allowing the anonymization of management practice implementation and data was proper under the rule and commentary of key element four of the Nonpoint Source Policy. |
Environmental Law |
|
J. Renner | Apr. 17, 2023 |
C071785
|
County of Butte v. Dept. of Water Resources
California's environmental impact report for licensed hydropower facilities was sufficient because whether climate change necessitated project operation changes was too uncertain to evaluate. |
Environmental Law |
|
S. Boulware Eurie | Apr. 11, 2023 |
A166221
|
East Oakland Stadium Alliance, LLC v. City of Oakland
Environmental impact report's assumption that displaced overnight truck parking could relocate from Howard Terminal to nearby lots within the Port of Oakland was supported by substantial evidence. |
Environmental Law |
|
T. Brown | Apr. 3, 2023 |
21-71170
|
City of Los Angeles v. Federal Aviation Administration
Environmental impact statement was deficient because its construction noise analysis was based on faulty assumption that multiple types of construction equipment would not operate simultaneously. |
Environmental Law |
|
S. Higginson | Mar. 30, 2023 |
B306658
|
Modification: Pacific Palisades Residents Assn., Inc. v. City of Los Angeles
Senior living home project in the Pacific Palisades was exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act because it was built in an urbanized area with no requirement for architectural uniformity. |
Environmental Law |
|
J. Wiley | Mar. 29, 2023 |
C093351
|
California Manufacturers & Technology Assoc. v. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment could use nonadverse health effects in assessing and setting public health goal water contamination numbers. |
Environmental Law |
|
A. Hoch | Mar. 24, 2023 |
C093513
|
Environmental Law Foundation v. State Water Resources Control Bd.
State Water Board's adoption of order allowing the anonymization of management practice implementation and data was proper under the rule and commentary of key element four of the Nonpoint Source Policy. |
Environmental Law |
|
J. Renner | Mar. 21, 2023 |
A165451
|
Modification: Make UC a Good Neighbor v. Regents of University of Cal.
Environmental Impact Report for the University of California, Berkeley's proposed housing project requiring the demolition of People's Park, a historic site, was deficient because it failed to provide project alternatives. |
Environmental Law |
|
G. Burns | Mar. 17, 2023 |
B306658
|
Pacific Palisades Residents Assn., Inc. v. City of Los Angeles
Senior living home project in the Pacific Palisades was exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act because it was built in an urbanized area with no requirement for architectural uniformity. |
Environmental Law |
|
J. Wiley | Mar. 10, 2023 |
B309225
|
Spencer v. City of Palos Verdes Estates
City of Palos Verdes Estates was liable under the California Coastal Act for wood hangout built on their property by group of self-appointed local guardians of a surf spot. |
Environmental Law |
|
L. Rubin | Mar. 1, 2023 |
A165451
|
Make UC a Good Neighbor v. Regents of University of Cal.
Environmental Impact Report for the University of California, Berkeley's proposed housing project requiring the demolition of People's Park, a historic site, was deficient because it failed to provide project alternatives. |
Environmental Law |
|
G. Burns | Feb. 28, 2023 |
20-70272
|
Amended Opinion: Center for Community Action v. Federal Aviation Administration
Petitioners seeking review of a Federal Aviation Administration Final Environmental Assessment finding bear the burden of showing missteps on the part of the FAA. |
Environmental Law |
|
Feb. 27, 2023 | |
21-16958
|
American Rivers v. American Petroleum Institute
Under the Administrative Procedure Act, district courts must first find Clean Water Act rule changes unlawful in order to vacate the rule. |
Environmental Law |
|
M. Friedland | Feb. 22, 2023 |
B320586
|
Arcadians for Environmental Preservation v. City of Arcadia
Environmental organization's environmental impact report and general references to potential environmental impacts did not satisfy its exhaustion requirement for CEQA challenge to next-door neighbor's house expansion. |
Environmental Law |
|
D. Perluss | Feb. 17, 2023 |
G060850
|
IBC Business Owners for Sensible Development v. City of Irvine
City erred in approving project development based on addendum to a program environmental impact report as insufficient evidence supported its finding on the project's gas emissions and the project did not qualify for an exemption. |
Environmental Law |
|
E. Moore | Feb. 8, 2023 |
21-35121
|
Center for Biological Diversity v. Haaland, et al.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's denial of a petition to amend Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan was unreviewable because the Plan was not an action "from which legal consequences will flow." |
Environmental Law |
|
A. Hurwitz | Jan. 24, 2023 |
C096617A
|
Save Our Capitol v. Department of General Services
Because the Historic Capital project description significantly changed from the recirculated draft environmental impact report to the final EIR, it ran afoul of CEQA. |
Environmental Law |
|
H. Hull | Jan. 20, 2023 |
19-72109
|
Center for Food Safety v. Regan
Where vacatur might cause more environmental harm, remand was appropriate for the Environmental Protection Agency to address and complete environmental law requirements. |
Environmental Law |
|
K. Lee | Dec. 22, 2022 |
A163192
|
Save North Petaluma River and Wetlands v. City of Petaluma
Environmental impact report properly analyzed impacts to special status species because it was based on facts and expert opinion and amply demonstrated the analytic route from such evidence to environmentally significant action. |
Environmental Law |
|
C. Fujisaki | Dec. 15, 2022 |
F082604
|
American Chemistry Council v. Dept. of Toxic Substances Control
The Department of Toxic Substances Control has authority to list spray foam systems as a priority product that may be considered a chemical of concern under the Green Chemistry law. |
Environmental Law |
|
B. Hill | Dec. 14, 2022 |
A164629
|
Saint Ignatius Neighborhood Assn. v. City and County of San Francisco
High school's project to install 90-foot lights in its stadium was not categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act review. |
Environmental Law |
|
S. Pollak | Dec. 8, 2022 |