14 Cited authorities

  1. Cit. for Resp. Growth v. City

    40 Cal.4th 412 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 305 times   15 Legal Analyses
    In Vineyard, supra, 40 Cal.4th at pages 439–442, 53 Cal.Rptr.3d 821, 150 P.3d 709, the Final EIR provided conflicting figures concerning both expected water supply and expected water demand, and gave estimates contrary to a related environmental report.
  2. Committee for Green Foothills v. Santa Clara

    48 Cal.4th 32 (Cal. 2010)   Cited 263 times   11 Legal Analyses
    In Committee for Green Foothills, one of the cases cited by respondents, a county board of supervisors authorized the county to enter a trails agreement that had been negotiated with a university, and the county subsequently filed a revised NOD that included both trails at issue in its description of the project.
  3. Laurel Heights Improv. v. Regents of Univ. of Calif

    47 Cal.3d 376 (Cal. 1988)   Cited 465 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an EIR must include an analysis of the environmental effects of future expansion if it is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the initial project and the future expansion will be significant in that it will likely change the scope or nature of the initial project or its environmental effects
  4. Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors

    52 Cal.3d 553 (Cal. 1990)   Cited 227 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Requiring range of alternatives that offer substantial environmental advantages and are feasible
  5. Associated Home Builders Etc. v. City of Livermore

    18 Cal.3d 582 (Cal. 1976)   Cited 231 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Concluding that the plaintiff had not carried its burden to rebut the presumptive constitutionality of an exclusionary ordinance that prohibited issuance of further residential building permits until certain standards where met where "plaintiff assert[ed] the existence of an acute housing shortage in the San Francisco Bay Area, but present[ed] no evidence to document that shortage or to relate it to the probable effect of the Livermore ordinance"
  6. No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles

    13 Cal.3d 68 (Cal. 1974)   Cited 240 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In NoOil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68 [ 118 Cal.Rptr. 34, 529 P.2d 66] (No Oil, Inc.), discussing whether the proper scope of an EIR included possible related future actions, we quoted this observation from a federal decision: "`Statements must be written late enough in the development process to contain meaningful information, but they must be written early enough so that whatever information is contained can practically serve as an input into the decision making process.'"
  7. Sierra Club v. State Bd. of Forestry

    7 Cal.4th 1215 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 131 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Noting that "the [California Board of Forestry] has the ultimate power of approval over a [THP]"
  8. Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood

    45 Cal.4th 116 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 74 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the "two considerations of legislative policy important to the timing of mandated EIR preparation: that CEQA not be interpreted to require an EIR before the project is well enough defined to allow for meaningful environmental evaluation; and that CEQA not be interpreted as allowing an EIR to be delayed beyond the time when it can, as a practical matter, serve its intended function of informing and guiding decision makers."
  9. Friends of Sierra Madre v. City of Sierra Madre

    25 Cal.4th 165 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 47 times   5 Legal Analyses
    In Sierra Madre, our Supreme Court held that the City Council of Sierra Madre could not avoid CEQA review of its decision to remove certain structures from historic preservation status simply by submitting an ordinance to the voters proposing such an action.
  10. Native Am. Sacred Site E.P.A. v. City

    120 Cal.App.4th 961 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 9 times   6 Legal Analyses
    In Native American, the City of San Juan Capistrano was presented with an initiative petition that qualified for adoption by the city council or placement on the ballot under section 9214. The city and city council (defendants) negotiated an implementation agreement "to mitigate certain conditions" and passed an ordinance that adopted both the initiative and the implementation agreement.
  11. Section 15378 - Project

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15378   Cited 45 times   2 Legal Analyses

    (a) "Project" means the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and that is any of the following: (1) An activity directly undertaken by any public agency including but not limited to public works construction and related activities clearing or grading of land, improvements to existing public structures, enactment and amendment of zoning ordinances, and the

  12. Section 15090 - Certification of the Final EIR

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15090   Cited 6 times

    (a) Prior to approving a project the lead agency shall certify that: (1) The final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; (2) The final EIR was presented to the decisionmaking body of the lead agency and that the decisionmaking body reviewed and considered the information contained in the final EIR prior to approving the project; and (3) The final EIR reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis. (b) When an EIR is certified by a non-elected decision-making body within a

  13. Rule 8.204 - Contents and format of briefs

    Cal. R. 8.204   Cited 2,659 times

    (a) Contents (1) Each brief must: (A) Begin with a table of contents and a table of authorities separately listing cases, constitutions, statutes, court rules, and other authorities cited; (B) State each point under a separate heading or subheading summarizing the point, and support each point by argument and, if possible, by citation of authority; and (C) Support any reference to a matter in the record by a citation to the volume and page number of the record where the matter appears. If any part

  14. Rule 2.301 - Definitions

    Cal. R. 2.301   Cited 2 times

    As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires: (1) "Fax" is an abbreviation for "facsimile" and refers, as indicated by the context, to facsimile transmission or to a document so transmitted. (2) "Fax transmission" means the transmission of a document by a system that encodes a document into electrical signals, transmits these electrical signals over a telephone line, and reconstructs the signals to print a duplicate of the original document at the receiving end. (3) "Fax machine"