Miller Starr Regalia

On May 23, 2012, the California Supreme Court by unanimous vote granted respondents’ and real parties’ petition for review of the First District Court of Appeal’s published decision in Berkeley Hillside Preservation, et al. v…more

In a highly detailed and analytical opinion, the Fifth District Court of Appeal addressed and answered numerous novel legal questions regarding the proper interpretation and application of Public Resources Code § 21167.6(e),…more

In a series of decisions that had agency planners and environmental consultants scratching their heads, various courts of appeal last year held that every CEQA document must take account of existing conditions in assessing…more

Rejecting intervenors’ challenges to a pre-litigation tolling agreement between a CEQA plaintiff (Salmon Protection and Watershed Network, or “SPAWN”) and Marin County, in an action challenging the EIR for a countrywide general…more

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

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

In an earlier post (“Ten CEQA Litigation Mistakes To Avoid,” September 13, 2011), one bullet point discussed the potential pitfall of concurrently-applicable non-CEQA limitations periods barring CEQA claims. Numerous cases have…more

In a CEQA challenge to the City of Berkeley’s approvals to demolish an existing single-family home and replace it with a larger one and an attached 10-car garage, Division 4 of the First District Court of Appeal held…more

The CEQA “baseline” rules have received a lot of judicial attention in the last several years, and rightly so.  The baseline or “environmental setting,” is the fundamental “benchmark”…more

–– “Badges? We ain’t got no badges. We don’t need no badges! I don’t have to show you any stinkin’ badges!” Gold Hat to Dobbs,in Treasure of the Sierra Madre…more

When a CEQA project proposes the modification or demolition of a historically-significant property, or the sale of such a property by a government agency owner, the potentially significant impacts to the historic resource…more

The proper content of CEQA administrative records is frequently a subject of intense dispute in CEQA litigation, resulting in partial certifications by agencies, and motions to strike and augment by various parties. In a recent…more

In an opinion filed December 29, 2011, the California Supreme Court upheld Assembly Bill 1X 26, which dissolves redevelopment agencies as of October 1, 2011. The opinion also invalidated Assembly Bill 1X 27, which provides for…more

It’s a common error in logic to suppose that because two things are in spatial or temporal proximity, one must be the cause of the other – a confusion of cause and affect. A line of CEQA cases – beginning with Baird v. County of…more

Last February, I co-authored a California Land Use Law & Policy Reporter lead article analyzing three significant 2010 decisions addressing the rules for setting the CEQA “baseline,” i.e., the starting point from which…more