Repetitive CEQA review and analysis is expensive, unnecessary, unproductive, and inimical to the goals of certainty and finality in the environmental review process. In 2011, to address these concerns in the infill development…more
In its terse, no-nonsense opinion in Alliance For the Protection of the Auburn Community v. County of Placer, et al. (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 25, ordered published onApril 2, 2013, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a…more
In Golden Gate Land Holdings LLC v. East Bay Regional Park District (4/12/13 1st Dist., Div. 5) _____ Cal.App.4th _____, 2013 WL 1491547, the First District Court of Appeal explored the scope and proper application of CEQA’s…more
The merger doctrine is not absolute and its application will depend upon the equities and the parties’ intentions, the California Court of Appeal recently held in Hamilton Court, LLC v. East Olympic, L.P., 2013 WL 1613269 (2nd…more
In R.E. Loans LLC v. Investors Warranty of America, Inc. (2013) 212 Cal.App.4th 1432, the court of appeal decided that a subordination agreement was enforceable even though the new deed of trust (“subordinating loan”) to which…more
In a recently published opinion construing Government Code § 65457’s exemption from environmental review for a residential development consistent with a specific plan for which an EIR was previously certified, the First District…more
In Appel v. Superior Court (No. B244590, 3/11/13), California’s Second District Court of Appeal held that the proper measure of a mechanic’s lien claim is the lesser of the reasonable value of the services and materials…more
Ruling from the bench at a March 29, 2013 hearing, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch found a key provision of an ambitious CEQA reform law championed by Senator Darrell Steinberg to be unconstitutional…more
Spring is here, and it seems the judicial, legislative and executive branches of government have all been busy trying to “clean up” CEQA and related areas of the law in one way or another. Recent items of interest…more
Starting July 1, 2013, you will be legally required to make the following additional disclosures in certain California real estate contracts and leases:
Accessibility Compliance Disclosure:
California Civil Code…more
The Second District Court of Appeal upheld the County of Santa Barbara’s Final Revised Environmental Impact Report for a 30-year conditional use permit (CUP) for the Diamond Rock mine project. Save Cuyama Valley v. County of…more
I. INTRODUCTION -
After years of legislative tinkering, the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, which regulates common interest developments such as condominiums, finally underwent a long-awaited restructuring…more
In November 2012, the Third District Court of Appeal decided that a trial court does not have the power to extinguish an expressly granted easement merely because in that judge’s opinion the dominant tenement does not really…more
On February 22, 2013, Senator President Pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg introduced SB 731, a bill the Senator’s website press release described as “outlining the detailed intent that strengthens [CEQA’s] protection of the state’s…more
After receiving three separate petitions for review, including petitions from real parties Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and the City of Sonora, the California Supreme Court voted unanimously on February 13, 2013 to grant review of the…more
