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
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 3DCA Jan. 20, 2023
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 9th Dec. 22, 2022
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 1DCA/3 Dec. 15, 2022
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 5DCA Dec. 14, 2022
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 1DCA/4 Dec. 8, 2022
Modification: Atlantic Richfield Co. v. California Regional Water Quality
Substantial evidence supported the conclusion that a parent company exercised eccentric control over mining operations and thus was directly liable for pollution as an operator of a polluting facility owned by a subsidiary. 		Environmental Law 3DCA Dec. 7, 2022
Save Our Capitol v. Dept. of General Services
Changes made to the exterior design of a historic building in the project's final environmental impact report rendered the project description unstable in violation of the California Environmental Quality Act. 		Environmental Law 3DCA Dec. 7, 2022
Atlantic Richfield Co. v. California Regional Water Quality
Substantial evidence supported the conclusion that a parent company exercised eccentric control over mining operations and thus was directly liable for pollution as an operator of a polluting facility owned by a subsidiary. 		Environmental Law 3DCA Nov. 16, 2022
Modification: Athletics Investment Group v. Dept. of Toxic Substances Control
New Hazardous Waste Control Law provision did not require the Department of Toxic Substances Control to rescind a certification for treated metal-shredder waste as nonhazardous. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/3 Oct. 24, 2022
Amended Opinion: 350 Montana v. Haaland
Department of Interior's finding of no significant environmental impact required more analysis than potential greenhouse gas emissions being "minor" relative to other global emissions sources. 		Environmental Law 9th Oct. 17, 2022
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 9th Oct. 12, 2022
Athletics Investment Group v. Dept. of Toxic Substances Control
New Hazardous Waste Control Law provision did not require the Department of Toxic Substances Control to rescind a certification for treated metal-shredder waste as nonhazardous. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/3 Oct. 4, 2022
Environmental Health Advocates, Inc. v. Sream, Inc.
In a Prop 65 case, a bong that could be used to smoke marijuana did not directly expose individuals to cancer-causing chemicals. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/2 Sep. 28, 2022
San Luis Obispo Coastkeeper v. Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District
Where statute allowed for dam's construction "for other purposes," it could be read harmoniously with the Endangered Species Act to allow water release for endangered fish's reproductive migration. 		Environmental Law 9th Sep. 26, 2022
California State Water Resources Control Board v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
California Water Resources Control Board was not engaged in coordinated effort with hydroelectric water project applicants to delay federal certification because it merely acquiesced to the applicants' decisions. 		Environmental Law 9th Aug. 5, 2022
County of Mono v. City of Los Angeles
City's decision to reduce the water allocated for irrigation was a continuing part of an earlier, ongoing project covered by leases and not a new project subject to CEQA requirements. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/4 Jul. 28, 2022
Tulelake Irrigation District v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Conservation plan restricting agricultural use of leased wildlife refuge lands was not unlawful when it ensured the refuge's purpose of waterfowl management was carried out without disallowing compatible uses. 		Environmental Law 9th Jul. 19, 2022
Center for Biological Diversity v. Haaland
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's decision-making process for adopting a Comprehensive Conservation Plan for refuges was in accordance with law. 		Environmental Law 9th Jul. 19, 2022
Audubon Society of Portland v. Haaland
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service properly exercised its professional judgment in allowing a mix of agricultural land and natural habitat in the Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuge Complex. 		Environmental Law 9th Jul. 19, 2022
California River Watch v. City of Vacaville
City's coincidental transportation of carcinogenic waste through its water-supply system was not enough to establish liability under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 		Environmental Law 9th Jul. 5, 2022
West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency
Clean Air Act Section 111(d) did not grant congressional authority on the Environmental Protection Agency to devise emissions caps in the manner the EPA prescribed in the Clean Power Plan. 		Environmental Law USSC Jul. 1, 2022
Natural Resources Defense Council v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
In actively issuing its interim decision regarding glyphosate, the Environmental Protection Agency was required to comply with the Endangered Species Act's consultation procedures. 		Environmental Law 9th Jun. 20, 2022
Committee for Sound Water v. City of Seaside
The shortening of Emergency Rule 9's tolling period for certain causes of action did not deprive petitioners of a reasonable time to file a writ alleging California Environmental Quality Act violations. 		Environmental Law 6DCA Jun. 3, 2022
Environmental Defense Center v. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
Because environmental agencies relied on questionable assumptions, they failed to take the "hard look" mandated by the National Environmental Policy Act. 		Environmental Law 9th Jun. 3, 2022
Almond Alliance of California et al. v. Fish and Game Commission et al.
Four species of bumble bees may be listed as endangered species since the Fish & Game Code Section 45's broad definition of "fish" includes terrestrial invertebrates. 		Environmental Law 3DCA Jun. 1, 2022
We Advocate Through Environmental Review v. County of Siskiyou
Under the California Environmental Quality Act, project objectives that are essentially just completing the project as planned are impermissibly narrow. 		Environmental Law 3DCA May 16, 2022
Tiburon Open Space Committee v. County of Marin
Marin County's adherence to development plans, because it was "legally infeasible" not to, was proper and opposers failed to provide substantial evidence to prove otherwise. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/2 May 16, 2022
Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acted arbitrarily and capriciously in approving a mining plan of operations based on its incorrect assumption that company's mining claims were valid under the Mining Law. 		Environmental Law 9th May 13, 2022
We Advocate Through Environmental Review v. City of Mt. Shasta
City should have made certain findings under the California Environmental Quality Act for each significant impact that the county identified before issuing a wastewater permit to a water bottling plant. 		Environmental Law 3DCA May 12, 2022
Natural Resources Defense Council v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Protection Agency's denial of petition to cancel registration of pesticide due to safety concerns was at odds with its own prior assumptions and statements and not supported by substantial evidence. 		Environmental Law 9th Apr. 21, 2022
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.