On-Demand Webinar | Regulatory Uncertainty and Linear Infrastructure Projects: Where Are We and What’s Ahead?
CCUS: Understanding The Class VI Permitting Process
Federal Contracting Overseas: Insider Tips for Ensuring Compliance with Host Country Laws
On-Demand Webinar | Charting a Course for Offshore Wind Energy in California
Wiley Webinar: Biotech Briefings – U.S. Department of Agriculture – Plant Pests and Importation Part 330
Jones Day Talks: Developments in Germany's Wind Power Regulations
[WEBINAR] Fairly (or Unfairly?) Traceable: Are Discharges Through Groundwater Subject to the Clean Water Act?
How Trump's Infrastructure Plan Impacts the Energy Industry
The Koontz Decision: Limits Conditions a Government can Impose on Developers
Supreme Court Hands Landowners a Major Victory - Nossaman's Brad Kuhn
Do you know the restrictions for a probationary driver in New Jersey?
California Lawmakers Making a Strong Push to Ban Hydraulic Fracturing
City of Los Angeles - The Processes and Procedures Ordinance Becomes Operative January 22, 2024 - The city council adopted the Processes and Procedures Ordinance amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) to...more
On May 11, 2022, the Third District Court of Appeal published its opinion in We Advocate Through Environmental Review v. City of Mount Shasta (2022) 78 Cal.App.5th 629, reversing the decision below and ordering the trial...more
The Court of Appeal held that the City of Mount Shasta violated CEQA by approving a wastewater permit for a water bottling plant without making specific findings as to each potentially significant impact identified as...more
Friends, Artists and Neighbors of Elkhorn Slough v. California Coastal Commission, 2021 WL 5905714 (No. H048088, 6th Dist., December 14, 2021) The court of appeal found that the California Coastal Commission erred by...more
In an opinion filed November 15, and later ordered published on December 14, 2021, the Sixth District Court of Appeal reaffirmed the basic CEQA principle that required environmental review and analysis must precede project...more
On May 6, 2021, members of Nossaman’s Coastal Development and Environment & Land Use Groups along with some special guest speakers discussed current proposals and pending regulations concerning offshore wind development along...more
Please join members of Nossaman’s Coastal Development and Environment & Land Use Groups on May 6, 2021 from 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. PT as we present “Charting a Course for Offshore Wind Energy in California” to discuss...more
We are pleased to once again present Land Use Matters, our publication that provides updates on new CEQA court decisions as well as planning developments for the City of Los Angeles and the County of Los Angeles. We realize...more
The Third District Court of Appeal held that CEQA and permitting challenges to an expansion project were moot because defendants had already completed construction and did not build the project in violation of any court...more
In a 68-page published opinion filed September 27, 2019, the Fourth District Court of Appeal (Div. One) affirmed the trial court’s judgment rejecting a plaintiff group’s numerous challenges to the California Coastal...more
Welcome to CEQA News You Can Use, a quarterly production of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP’s Natural Resources lawyers. This publication provides quick, useful bites of CEQA news, which we hope can be a resource to your...more
Welcome to Alston & Bird’s Environmental & Land Use Briefing, a summary of emerging issues and recent developments in environmental and land use law. ...more
In an opinion filed June 28, and later ordered published on July 27, 2018, the Second District Court of Appeal (Div. 6) affirmed the trial court’s judgment dismissing on demurrer a writ petition seeking to compel the County...more
On May 25, 2017, the First Appellate District published a modified version of its unpublished March 23, 2017 opinion, holding that the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District’s (“MCAQMD”) issuance of an “Authority to...more
On May 3–4, 2017, the California Supreme Court heard oral arguments in three cases with significant implications for California land use law. Below we summarize the main issue(s) argued in each matter and possible outcomes....more
A 2008 California Supreme Court decision, Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood, cast doubt on local governments’ ability to enter into agreements with private developers prior to completing project review under the California...more
As we enter the fall season, substantial portions of California and the Pacific Northwest are experiencing extreme to exceptional drought conditions. While conditions are better in Texas and other nearby states this year,...more
Bowman v. California Coastal Commission - Why it matters: The Court in Bowman held that a permit condition could not be modified or deleted by a second permit that included the same project, even if the first permit...more
In a lengthy opinion filed February 28, 2014, and ordered partially published on April 1, 2014, the Third District Court of Appeal reversed the Yolo County Superior Court’s judgment denying a CEQA writ petition challenging...more
Harmonizing CEQA’s rules and principles is, to say the least, not always easy, and is often quite challenging. The relevant concepts are often in tension, or are so malleable that they can be argued or construed to conflict....more
In This Issue: - Project Approvals Triggering CEQA ..Chung v City of Monterey Park (2012) 210 CA4th 394 ..Tuolumne Jobs and Small Business Alliance v Superior Court) 210 CA4th 1006 (petition for review pending,...more
As the year comes to an end, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is facing a heightened level of focus from legislators and the general public as CEQA reform efforts for 2013 begin to take shape across the state....more