Administrative Law › Zoning, Planning & Land Use › Civil Remedies

Eminent Domain to Be Used for I-80 and I-680 Interchange

California continues to move forward with more infrastructure improvement projects. According to an article in the Daily Republic, Agency starts eminent domain proceedings for I-80/680 project, the Solano Transportation...more

What is the "relevant parcel" in a regulatory takings case?

In Lost Tree Village Corporation v. United States, the Federal Circuit addressed this question head on, concluding, to the surprise of no one, that the answer will largely depend upon the unique facts in each case. ...more

Shell E & P Ireland Ltd v McGrath & ors

Judgement in Shell E & P Ireland Ltd v McGrath & ors

2.1 Shell issued proceedings against the six named defendants on the 4th March, 2005 with a statement of claim being delivered on the 18th April. Damages were sought together with various orders restraining the defendants...more

Supreme Court Hears Argument on Takings Case: Koontz v. St. John's River Water Management District

As we previewed in our recent "year in review" piece, the U.S. Supreme Court has some takings issues before it this term. One case, Koontz v. St. John's River Water Management District, took center stage yesterday. ...more

CEQA Standing Reform: Could Statutory Standing Requirements Feasibly Be Tightened To Bar Anti-Competitive Lawsuits Motivated By...

Meaningful CEQA reform is a topic much discussed by politicians and stakeholders, but its realization remains elusive. For example, in-fill exemptions are fettered with multitudes of complex and convoluted conditions and...more

I Saw the Sign, and It . . . Was Taken Down?

Those don't quite sound like the lyrics to the early-90's popular Ace of Base hit, "The Sign." But they likely describe the situation of many travelers on the I-10 freeway in Los Angeles thanks to a recent California Court...more

CEQA Remedies Clarified

Preserve Wild Santee v. City of Santee Finds That CEQA Allows Courts to Issue Limited Fix-It Tickets for CEQA Deficiencies in EIRs Rather Than Decertifying the Entire EIR and Invalidating All Related Project Approvals. ...more

W.Va. Supreme Court Affirms Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses Against WVDEP In Surface Mine Board Appeals

By a per curiam (“for the Court”) decision issued on October 19, 2012, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals ruled that the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (“WVDEP”) is obligated to pay the Hominy...more

Public Entity Litigants Are Entitled to Attorney Fee Award Under Private Attorney General Doctrine Even Where Non Financial...

In City of Maywood v. Los Angeles Unified School District, 2012 DJDAR 9925 (2012), the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District decided a novel attorney fee case. The case arose out of a petition for a...more

Parties Must Exhaust Administrative Remedies Before Challenging Even A CEQA Exemption

The California Supreme Court recently reinforced the CEQA requirement that a party must exhaust administrative remedies even where the public agency finds a project exempt from CEQA, if the agency (a) gave notice of the...more

UPDATE: Exhaustion-Of-Administrative-Remedies Requirement Applies If There Is A Public Hearing Before An Agency Determines A...

The California Supreme Court recently held that the exhaustion-of-administrative-remedies requirement found in Public Resources Code § 21177, subdivision (a), applies where a public agency determines that a proposed project...more

A Win for Texas: Fifth Circuit Finds EPA’s Disapproval of State Implementation Plan Arbitrary and Capricious

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) disapproval of Texas’ State Implementation Plan (SIP), finding that the EPA’s action was arbitrary and capricious. In Luminant...more

Update on Pa. Municipality Act 13 Lawsuit

As reported in the March edition of The Shale Play Today, seven Pennsylvania municipalities filed suit in the Commonwealth Court on March 29, 2012, challenging the provision of Act 13 providing that state law preempts the...more

Appellate Court Upholds Use of Future CEQA Baseline in Neighbors for Smart Rail and Rejects Sunnyvale Holding

On April 17, 2012, the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District issued its opinion in Neighbors for Smart Rail v. Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority holding that in certain circumstances – projected future...more

Real Estate Legal News - April 4, 2012 • Spring Edition

IN THIS ISSUE: - Michigan Legislature Reacts Quickly To Dramatic Nonrecourse Liability Decisions Michigan became the focus of national attention in the world of commercial real estate finance in December, when the...more

First District Holds CEQA Does Not Apply To Napa County Ordinance Clarifying Its Ministerial Lot Line Adjustment Practice, And...

In a case addressing important issues affecting local agencies and landowners (disclaimer: I represented the County of Napa in the trial court and on appeal), the First District (Division 4) Court of Appeal on April 20, 2012...more

Wondering About the Status of EPA's CCR Rule? So Are 11 Environmental Groups

I have had a number of clients ask me recently about the status of EPA’s efforts to regulate coal combustion residuals under RCRA. It turns out that some environmental groups have been asking themselves the same question....more

Supreme Court Declines to Review or Depublish “CEQA In Reverse” Decision

On March 21, 2012, the California Supreme Court denied a petition for review of the Second District’s published opinion in Ballona Wetlands Land Trust, et al. v. City of Los Angeles (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 455 (“Ballona...more

Sackett v. EPA: Property Owners May Challenge EPA Orders

The United States Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrative orders under the Clean Water Act are subject to pre-enforcement judicial review. However, the Supreme Court’s...more

Supreme Court Affirms the Right to Judicial Review of EPA Compliance Orders

On March 21, 2012, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, a major victory for persons subjected to administrative "compliance orders" of the EPA, which the...more

Supreme Court Expands Right to Challenge Federal Assertions of Clean Water Act Regulatory Jurisdiction

On March 21, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that landowners may bring a civil action under the AdministrativeProcedure Act to challenge administrative compliance orders issued under the Clean Water Act. Sackett v. EPA, __...more

US Supreme Court Rules Property Owners May Sue the EPA Over a Wetlands Restoration Order

In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that two Idaho property owners may bring a legal challenge to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) issuance of an administrative order that required the...more

Supreme Court Rules that U.S. EPA Unilateral Compliance Orders Under the Clean Water Act Are Final Actions Judicially Reviewable

In Sackett et vir v. Environmental Protection Agency, the United States Supreme Court held unanimously that a compliance order issued under §309(a)(3) of the Clean Water Act2 is “final action” that is subject to judicial...more

U.S. Supreme Court Opens Courthouse Doors for Early Challenges to Environmental Agency Orders

The Supreme Court today handed down its decision in the widely discussed case of Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, addressing the question of whether a regulated party can obtain pre-enforcement review of EPA...more

Supreme Court Opens District Courts to Challenges of Clean Water Act Compliance Orders

The United States Supreme Court issued a decision yesterday in the case Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency. The Sackett case is an important development for property owners because the Court held that a compliance...more