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
United Artists Theater Circuit v. Regional Water Quality Control Board
Prior owner may be named in cleanup order as one who 'permitted' discharge if it knew or should have known that lessee's activity presented a reasonable possibility of hazardous waste discharge. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/5 Dec. 3, 2019
Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Petition for review pursuant to Toxic Substances Control Act granted only as to claim that EPA's exclusion of legacy uses and associated disposals contradicted TSCA's statutory definition of 'conditions of use.' 		Environmental Law 9th Nov. 15, 2019
Atlantic Richfield v. Central Valley Regional Water Quality
A parent company may have direct liability for hazardous waste caused by its subsidiary if it is found to control the activities responsible for the waste. 		Environmental Law 3DCA Oct. 16, 2019
Maacama Watershed Alliance v. County of Sonoma
Opinions of local residents, based largely on views of different structure, did not constitute substantial evidence that winery will have a significant aesthetic impact; thus, judgment was affirmed. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/4 Oct. 9, 2019
Chico Advocates for a Responsible Economy v. City of Chico
Likely loss of "close and convenient shopping" was not an environmental issue requiring review under CEQA, and the City of Chico's reasons for its decisions were not clearly inadequate or unsupported. 		Environmental Law 3DCA Oct. 4, 2019
Protect Our Communities Foundation v. LaCounte
New information relating to adverse impact to golden eagles from wind turbines was not significant under National Environmental Protection Act because it merely confirmed concerns that environmental impact statement already considered. 		Environmental Law 9th Sep. 24, 2019
Lindstrom v. Cal. Coastal Commission
California Coastal Commission's special conditions on approval of coastal development permit were generally acceptable, but special condition 3.b was overbroad and unreasonable as drafted so remand was necessary. 		Environmental Law 4DCA/1 Sep. 23, 2019
The Lake Norconian Club Foundation v. Dept. of Corrections
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation was under no statutory duty to maintain former hotel it owned, so failure to act was not correctible by writ of mandate. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/4 Sep. 16, 2019
County of Butte v. Dept. of Water Resources
Plaintiffs cannot challenge aspects of the Federal Power Act's Settlement Agreement process in state court, and 'Friends of the Eel River v. North Coast Railroad Authority' is inapplicable. 		Environmental Law 3DCA Sep. 9, 2019
Stopthemillenniumhollywood.com v. City of Los Angeles
Conceptual development scenarios in environmental impact report did not qualify as a stable or finite proposed project, and such nebulous descriptions prejudiced public participation in the CEQA process. 		Environmental Law 2DCA/3 Aug. 26, 2019
Union of Medical Marijuana Patients v. City of San Diego
Amending zoning regulations as part of ordinance regulating medical marijuana dispensaries was capable of causing indirect physical environmental changes, so the ordinance was a project necessitating CEQA analysis. 		Environmental Law CASC Aug. 20, 2019
Hubbard v. Coastal Commission
Despite intentional misrepresentations in coastal development permit application, substantial evidence supported the Coastal Commission's determination that complete information would not have changed its ruling on the application. 		Environmental Law 2DCA/4 Aug. 2, 2019
Hollywoodians Encouraging Rental Opportunities v. City of L.A.
City properly concluded that hotel project would have no impact on population and housing because it would not displace any tenants or eliminate any rental units; thus, CEQA claim failed. 		Environmental Law 2DCA/3 Jul. 23, 2019
Center for Biological Diversity v. Ilano
Designation of landscape-scale areas under Healthy Forests Restoration Act does not trigger National Environmental Policy Act analysis; thus, summary judgment in favor of defendant affirmed. 		Environmental Law 9th Jun. 25, 2019
Center for Biological Diversity v. CA Dept. of Conservation
Public Resources Code Section 3161(b)(3)(B)(ii) reflects legislative intent to limit scope of environmental impact report to well stimulation treatments only; thus, appellant's writ of mandate petition properly denied. 		Environmental Law 3DCA Jun. 19, 2019
Amended Opinion: Sierra Club v. USFWS
U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife Services and the National Marine Fisheries Service's April 2014 draft jeopardy opinion was pre-decisional and deliberative; thus, exempt from Freedom of Information Act. 		Environmental Law 9th May 31, 2019
Superseding Opinion: WildEarth Guardians v. Provencio
US Forest Service did not abuse discretion when creating off-road motorized vehicle plan that allowed for such vehicles in most of Kaibab National Forest, since other limitations in plans were present. 		Environmental Law 9th May 7, 2019
Oregon Natural Desert Association v. Rose
The substantive challenges to plan issued by Bureau of Land Management could not be reached under other acts because it was procedurally deficient under the National Environmental Policy Act. 		Environmental Law 9th Apr. 26, 2019
South of Market Community v. City and County of San Francisco
Environmental impact report was adequate under California Environmental Quality Act because project description clearly identified mixed-use development project at specific, defined location with two options for allocations of office and residential use. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/1 Mar. 27, 2019
Sturgeon v. Frost
Alaskan-specific statute providing greater freedom for users of national preserves in state prohibits federal regulation except over lands held in title by government. 		Environmental Law USSC Mar. 27, 2019
Ione Valley Land, Air, and Water etc. v. County of Amador
Where issues with original environmental impact report were or could have been litigated in initial challenge, such issues are precluded by res judicata from being re-raised against revised report. 		Environmental Law 3DCA Mar. 21, 2019
Modification: Fudge v. City of Laguna Beach
Legislature provided for de novo review of appeals to the Commission under Public Resources Code Section 21080.5, which allows environmental information to be submitted 'in lieu of' an environmental impact report under CEQA. 		Environmental Law 4DCA/3 Mar. 15, 2019
WildEarth Guardians v. Provencio
US Forest Service did not abuse discretion when creating off-road motorized vehicle plan that allowed for such vehicles in most of Kaibab National Forest, since other limitations in plans were present. 		Environmental Law 9th Mar. 14, 2019
Fudge v. City of Laguna Beach
Legislature provided for de novo review of appeals to the Commission under Public Resources Code Section 21080.5, which allows environmental information to be submitted 'in lieu of' an environmental impact report under CEQA. 		Environmental Law 4DCA/3 Feb. 14, 2019
In re Border Infrastructure Environmental Litigation
IIRIRA authorized DHS's border barrier projects and the court lacks jurisdiction to consider challenges to the DHS Secretary's waiving of various environmental laws with respect to its border barrier projects. 		Environmental Law 9th Feb. 12, 2019
Berkeley Hills Watershed Coalition v. City of Berkeley
'Location exception' to California Environmental Quality Act's Class 3 exemption applies where the project impacts public resources and earthquakes and landslides are geological events; thus the proposed construction was exempt. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/1 Feb. 1, 2019
Modification: McCorkle Eastside Neighborhood Group v. City of St. Helena
Cities are not required to have a design review ordinance, so when one does impose such an additional level of review, it is for the city to determine the scope of the review. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/5 Jan. 28, 2019
San Diegans for Open Government v. City of San Diego
Under CEQA guidelines, relevant issue in determining whether the existing facilities exemption applies is whether the project involves 'expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination.' 		Environmental Law 4DCA/1 Jan. 17, 2019
McCorkle Eastside Neighborhood Group v. City of St. Helena
Cities are not required to have a design review ordinance, so when one does impose such an additional level of review, it is for the city to determine the scope of the review. 		Environmental Law 1DCA/5 Jan. 14, 2019
Caltec AG v. Dept. of Pesticide Regulation
When read together, Food and Agricultural Code Sections 12753 and 14513 precludes any material classified as a 'pesticide' from also being classified as an 'auxiliary soil and plant substance, but not vice versa. 		Environmental Law 5DCA Jan. 4, 2019
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.