§Why CasetextPricing

SAN DIEGO, CITY OF v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY

Appellants, San Diego Metropolitan Transit System and San Diego Association of Governments, Supplemental Brief

10 Cited authorities

  1. Communities for a Better Environment v. City of Richmond

    184 Cal.App.4th 70 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 91 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Finding project description inadequate where project proponent provided conflicting descriptions of oil refinery project, leading to confusion over whether project would allow refinery to process a more pollution-intensive petroleum product

  2. City of Marina v. Board of Trustees of California State University

    39 Cal.4th 341 (Cal. 2006)   Cited 80 times   19 Legal Analyses
    In City of Marina v. Board of Trustees of California State University (2006) 39 Cal.4th 341 our Supreme Court described the rules that governed the development of the Ford Ord property in 2006: "Fort Ord is a former United States Army base on the Pacific Coast, about five miles north of Monterey and 125 miles south of San Francisco....

  3. Woodward Park Homeowners Assn. v. Garreks, Inc.

    77 Cal.App.4th 880 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000)   Cited 93 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting a city's argument that the case was moot because a carwash project was constructed and operating prior to the trial court's decision on the petition challenging the city's issuance of a mitigated negative declaration, because "a decision upholding the court's order directing the preparation of an EIR could result in modification of the project to mitigate adverse impacts or even removal of the project altogether"

  4. Californians for Alternatives to Toxics v. California Department of Pesticide Regulation

    136 Cal.App.4th 1049 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 40 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Exercising discretion to review moot claim where "the record before us contains all the information necessary to review these claims de novo"

  5. Tisher v. California Horse Racing Bd.

    231 Cal.App.3d 349 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 55 times

    Docket No. B053457. May 31, 1991. Appeal from Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. C759718, David P. Yaffe, Judge. COUNSEL Craigo Zimmerman and Richard W. Craigo for Plaintiffs and Appellants. Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, N. Eugene Hill, Assistant Attorney General, Henry G. Ullerich and Christopher C. Foley, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendant and Respondent. Mandel Norwood, S. Jerome Mandel and Naomi Norwood for Real Party in Interest and Respondent. OPINION SPENCER, P.J. — INTRODUCTION

  6. Golden Gate Land Holdings LLC v. E. Bay Reg'l Park Dist.

    215 Cal.App.4th 353 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 20 times   6 Legal Analyses

    A135593 2013-06-26 GOLDEN GATE LAND HOLDINGS LLC, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT, Defendant and Respondent. See 12 Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law (10th ed. 2005) Real Property, § 832 et seq. Superior Court of Alameda County, No. RG11575462, Evelio M. Grillo, Judge. Bruiniers See 12 Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law (10th ed. 2005) Real Property, § 832 et seq. Superior Court of Alameda County, No. RG11575462, Evelio M. Grillo, Judge. Briscoe Ivester & Bazel, John Briscoe, David

  7. Bruce v. Gregory

    65 Cal.2d 666 (Cal. 1967)   Cited 85 times
    Upholding writ decision by trial court based on new regulations promulgated after conduct and writ was filled, and where outcome would have been otherwise under old regulations

  8. City of Los Angeles v. County of Los Angeles

    147 Cal.App.3d 952 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 35 times
    Concluding that challenge to the constitutionality of property taxation system was rendered moot by constitutional amendment that changed system

  9. County of San Diego v. Brown

    19 Cal.App.4th 1054 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 13 times

    Docket Nos. D015543, D018698. October 22, 1993. Appeal from Superior Court of San Diego County, Nos. 568230, 596055 and 612752, Barbara T. Gamer, Judge. COUNSEL Lloyd M. Harmon, Jr., County Counsel, Diane Bardsley, Chief Deputy County Counsel, Michael B. Poynor, Bruce D. MacLeish and Ian Fan, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiffs and Appellants County of San Diego et al. Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, and Charlton G. Holland III, Assistant Attorney General, for Defendants and Appellants and

  10. Citizens for Non-Toxic Pest Control v. Department of Food & Agriculture

    187 Cal.App.3d 1575 (Cal. Ct. App. 1986)   Cited 7 times

    Docket No. A032176. December 19, 1986. Appeal from Superior Court of Humboldt County, No. 75602, William F. Ferroggiaro, Jr., Judge. COUNSEL John K. Van de Kamp, Attorney General, R.H. Connett, Assistant Attorney General, Roderick E. Walston and Charles W. Getz IV, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendants and Appellants. Victor M. Sher, Lobdell, Miller Sher, Michael B. Endicott and Ben T. Allen for Plaintiffs and Respondents. OPINION ANDERSON, P.J. This is an appeal from a judgment ordering relief