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

To Comply With The Brown Act, Consideration Of A CEQA Document Must Be Listed As A Separate Agenda Item From Consideration Of...

A county planning commission posted a meeting agenda that included an item on a potential approval of a subdivision application. At the meeting, the commission not only approved the subdivision, it also approved a Mitigated...more

Supreme Court Upholds FCC's Authority To Impose Time Limitations on Land Use Approvals for Wireless Facilities

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) had authority under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to impose time limits for state and local governments to act...more

California Court of Appeal Affirms Deferential CEQA Substantial Evidence Standard

On May 21, 2013, the California First District Court of Appeal certified for publication North Coast Rivers Alliance v. Marin Municipal Water District, an important CEQA opinion that affirms a highly deferential...more

Supreme Court Upholds FCC Authority to Address Wireless Siting

The Supreme Court today issued its decision in City of Arlington v. FCC—the case challenging the FCC’s 2009 “Shot Clock” declaratory ruling. The Supreme Court affirmed the Fifth Circuit, holding that Chevron deference applies...more

U.S. Supreme Court Allows FCC to Determine its Own Authority - Decision Upholds FCC Time Restrictions on Local Government...

The United States Supreme Court issued its decision in City of Arlington v. FCC, ruling that if an agency has general rulemaking or adjudicative power under a statute, courts must defer to all of the agency’s reasonable...more

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise: An Agency Cannot Revise Regulations In a Consent Decree

In a decision that should not have come as a surprise to anyone, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday, in Conservation Northwest v. Sherman, that the Bureau of Land Management and other agencies implementing the...more

Do We Really Have A Section 404 Permit?

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an opinion on April 23 in Mingo Logan Coal Co. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency upholding the Environmental Protection Agency’s...more

Supreme Court Willing to Reconsider Deference to Administrative Agencies

Most of the federal government's authority is exercised, on a day-to-day basis, through its administrative agencies. Central to the efficiency of those agencies — such as it is — is the judiciary's substantial deference to...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

Virginia Supreme Court Opinion Affecting Local Government Law, January 10, 2013

Today, the Virginia Supreme Court issued one opinion affecting Virginia local government law. Congratulations to the County of Albemarle and the City of Charlottesville! The Local Government Attorneys of Virginia supplied an...more

California Environmental Law and Policy Update - January 10, 2013

In This Issue: Environmental and Policy Focus - Supreme Court rejects Ninth Circuit ruling on County of L.A. storm water discharges; Federal judge halts major Lake Tahoe ski resort expansion; Lawsuit seeks to stop Rose...more

Recent Cases Show How CEQA’s Applicability And Substantive EIR Requirements Are Determined By Meaningful Agency Discretion

It is a fundamental precept of CEQA that it applies only to the discretionary approval of a project. If an agency has no discretion to deny or shape the project to address environmental concerns, CEQA review would be a...more

City May Not Settle Litigation By Negotiating Away Police Powers; Permits Issued Pursuant To Such Settlement Are Invalid

In Summit Media, LLC v. City of Los Angeles (--- Cal.Rptr.3d ----, Cal.App. 2 Dist., December 10, 2012), a California court of appeal considered a challenge to a settlement of a lawsuit between outdoor advertising companies...more

Supreme Court Case Involving CEQA’s “Unusual Circumstances” Exception to Categorical Exemptions Now Fully Briefed by Parties;...

The Respondent City of Berkeley and Real Parties (Kapors) filed their joint Reply Brief on the Merits in the California Supreme Court in a much-watched categorical exemption case, Berkeley Hillside Preservation, et al. v....more

U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments Set In Koontz v St John's River Water Management District for January 15, 2013

One month from now, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Case No. 11-1447, styled Coy A. Koontz, Jr., Petitioner v. St. Johns River Water Management District, Respondent (read the docket here). We've...more

NH Supreme Court Rules That State Law Preempts Municipal Restrictions on Excavation Permitting

On November 9, 2012, the New Hampshire Supreme Court issued its decision in Town of Carroll v. Rines (“Rines”), invalidating certain municipal regulations that limited excavations....more

How Much Uncertainty Does CEQA Allow? Court Upholds EIR's Practical Approach for Evaluating Uncertain Cumulative Impacts, but...

In Preserve Wild Santee v. City of Santee, the court immersed itself in an EIR’s evaluation of the impacts of a large residential project proposing 1,395 homes and 1,400 acres of open space preserve. The court upheld the...more

EIR Satisfies CEQA Despite Minor Deficiencies and Inaccuracies Where Environmental Review Process Not Prejudiced, Third District...

A unanimous Third District panel upheld SiskiyouCounty’s EIR for Roseburg Forest Products Co.’s (Roseburg) electricity cogeneration project involving expansion of its existing wood veneer manufacturing facility. (Mount Shasta...more

New Decision Limits Last-Minute Submissions for CEQA Hearings

All of us involved in land use and planning matters are familiar with the tactic of project opponents to file last-minute submissions with new factual allegations. These “hit pieces” are filed after the staff report is in,...more

Do You Need an Attorney To Sign Your Fill-in-the-Blank Form Complaint?

Tomorrow morning, the Illinois Supreme Court will file its opinion in Downtown Disposal Services, Inc. v. The City of Chicago. Tonight we'll preview the case. Tomorrow we'll bring you our summary and analysis of the Court's...more

Further Confirmation Notice of Exemption Filed Before Project Approval is Void

Coalition for Clean Air v. City of Visalia (Oct. 4, 2012, No. F062983M)- The partially published opinion in Coalition for Clean Air v. City of Visalia brightened the line regarding when a California Environmental Quality...more

Judge Dismisses Attorney General’s “Fracking” Suit Over the Delaware River Basin

U.S. District Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis recently dismissed a lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman against the Delaware River Basin Commission (“DRBC”), EPA, and other federal agencies seeking to...more

More Evidence That the Government No Longer Automatically Wins Superfund Cases: New Jersey Requires Proof of a Nexus Between a...

As I have previously noted, government attorneys’ traditional approach to litigating Superfund cases has been to announce that they represent the government and that they therefore win. There was hope, following the Supreme...more

Prematurely Filed Notice Of Exemption Does Not Trigger 35-Day Limitations Period In CEQA Actions

A court of appeal recently concluded that a notice of exemption filed before a project is actually approved is invalid and does not trigger the 35-day limitations period in which to bring a California Environmental Quality...more

Timing Is Everything: CEQA Notice of Exemption Must Be Both Facially Valid And Properly Filed To Trigger Short Limitations Period

In a partially published opinion filed September 14, 2012, the Fifth District Court of Appeal revived a CEQA lawsuit the trial court had dismissed as time-barred on demurrer because it was filed 55 days after the City of...more