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...
You must have a membership to view this page.
Daily appellate reports
Enewsletter Sign-up
    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
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
Safari Club International v. Haaland
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act preserved the federal government's plenary power over public lands, including the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, in Alaska. 		Environmental Law 9th Apr. 19, 2022
Modification: Buena Vista Water Storage Dist. v. Kern Water Bank Authority
Public water agency's environmental impact report for storage project to divert excess water met California Environmental Quality Act requirements with its good faith efforts at full disclosure. 		Environmental Law 2DCA/6 Apr. 13, 2022
Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center v. Stanislaus National Forest
Forest Service could implement best management practices under provisions of the Management Agency Agreement in lieu of reporting discharge requirements under the California Water Act. 		Environmental Law 9th Apr. 11, 2022
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 Apr. 5, 2022
Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters v. City of Los Angeles
Where an alternative project closely comported with and retained the original project's site specifications and size, the Environmental Impact Report's project definition was sufficiently accurate and stable. 		Environmental Law 2DCA/4 Apr. 1, 2022
Save the Hill Group v. City of Livermore
A reissued final environmental impact report certification and the development project's approval could not stand because the report's no-project alternative discussion was inadequate. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/5 Mar. 31, 2022
Buena Vista Water Storage Dist. v. Kern Water Bank Authority
Public water agency's environmental impact report for storage project to divert excess water met California Environmental Quality Act requirements with its good faith efforts at full disclosure. 		Environmental Law 2DCA/6 Mar. 24, 2022
Friends of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges v. Haaland
Secretary of the Interior had authority under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act to approve a land-exchange agreement that would balance environmental needs with the economic and social needs of Alaska natives. 		Environmental Law 9th Mar. 17, 2022
Friends of Animals v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Under the Endangered Species Act, a net conservation benefit can include an informational benefit that could aid in the conservation of a species. 		Environmental Law 9th Mar. 7, 2022
Save the El Dorado Canal v. El Dorado Irrigation Dist.
Water pipeline's project description in the environmental impact report meets California Environmental Quality Act requirement when it is adequate, complete and made a good faith effort at full disclosure. 		Environmental Law 3DCA Feb. 17, 2022
League to Save Lake Tahoe Mountain Area v. City of Placer
Factual statements by members of the public may constitute substantial evidence supporting an argument of potential significant impact necessitating, under CEQA, a report discussion on existing air and water quality. 		Environmental Law 3DCA Feb. 16, 2022
Mountain Communities for Fire Safety v. Elliott
U.S. Forest Service's "Timber Stand Improvement" regulation unambiguously allows commercial thinning of forest timber regardless of size or age. 		Environmental Law 9th Feb. 7, 2022
Los Padres Forestwatch v. U.S. Forest Service
Absent evidence demonstrating the U.S. Forest Service applied technical expertise to conclude timber cutting project should be approved, the court was forced to conclude the decision was arbitrary and capricious. 		Environmental Law 9th Feb. 7, 2022
Citizens' Committee to Complete the Refuge v. City of Newark
A development project was exempt from further California Environmental Quality Act review because no changes significantly increased the impacts on an endangered species. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/4 Jan. 31, 2022
Friends, Artists & Neighbors of Elkhorn Slough v. Cal. Coastal Com.
Granting a coastal development permit was improper when a required report discussing alternative and mitigating environmental measures did not precede the approval. 		Environmental Law 6DCA Dec. 15, 2021
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 Nov. 19, 2021
Amended Opinion: Inland Empire Waterkeeper v. Corona Clay
Because a failure to provide information about pollutant discharge violations could increase the risk of harm to recreational users of a nearby river, plaintiffs had standing to bring suit. 		Environmental Law 9th Nov. 8, 2021
Farmland Protection Alliance v. County of Yolo
A trial court did not have the authority under the California Environmental Quality Act to split a project's impact analysis across two types of environmental review documents. 		Environmental Law 3DCA Nov. 4, 2021
Protect Tustin Ranch v. City of Tustin
Substantial evidence supported a city's finding that the size of a proposed construction project qualified for the infill exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act. 		Environmental Law 4DCA/3 Oct. 28, 2021
McCann v. City of San Diego
The City of San Diego erred when it did not consider whether new projects were consistent with its own Climate Action Plan. 		Environmental Law 4DCA/1 Oct. 12, 2021
Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
A water quality variance regulation was not required to comply with the "highest attainable condition" from the outset, nor reach the base water quality standards by the end of the variance term. 		Environmental Law 9th Oct. 7, 2021
California River Watch v. City of Vacaville
A defendant can be held liable as a transporter of waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act even if it did not play a role in discarding the waste. 		Environmental Law 9th Sep. 30, 2021
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.