§Why CasetextPricing

CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY v. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE (NEWHALL LAND AND FARMING COMPANY)

Respondents’ Petition for Review

91 Cited authorities

  1. Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chap., Coms. for Great Ore

    515 U.S. 687 (1995)   Cited 528 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that EPA's interpretation of a statute was reasonable and deserving of deference even though the statute was criminally enforced

  2. Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope Opportunity

    19 Cal.4th 1106 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 1,068 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that anti-SLAPP motions brought "to strike a cause of action arising from a statement made before, or in connection with an issue under consideration by, a legally authorized official proceeding need not separately demonstrate that the statement concerned an issue of public significance."

  3. Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment Housing Com

    43 Cal.3d 1379 (Cal. 1987)   Cited 888 times
    Holding that the statute did not extend to cover remedies that were “different in kind from the enumerated remedies,” because “ more reasonable reading of the phrase ‘including, but not limited to,’ ... permitting only additional corrective remedies comports with the statutory construction doctrines of ejusdem generis, expressio unius est exclusio alterius and noscitur a sociis.”

  4. Reno v. Baird

    18 Cal.4th 640 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 581 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that FEHA's provisions regarding employment discrimination applied only to employers, in contrast to provisions regarding harassment which did apply to individuals as well as employers

  5. Western States Petroleum Assn. v. Superior Court (Air Resources Board)

    9 Cal.4th 559 (Cal. 1995)   Cited 584 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it would be improper to take judicial notice of evidence that was both absent from the administrative record and not before the agency at the time of its decision because such evidence is not relevant

  6. Cit. for Resp. Growth v. City

    40 Cal.4th 412 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 402 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Concluding “we determine de novo whether the agency has employed the correct procedures” in a case where appellant sought writ under both sections

  7. Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California

    47 Cal.3d 376 (Cal. 1988)   Cited 620 times   23 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

  8. People v. Murphy

    25 Cal.4th 136 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 337 times
    Holding that the Three Strikes sentencing scheme applied in addition to other sentencing enhancements because the phrase "notwithstanding any other law" was unambiguous

  9. Coal. of Conc. Com. v. City

    34 Cal.4th 733 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 252 times
    Confirming interpretation of the statutory text by examining the legislative history

  10. Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors

    52 Cal.3d 553 (Cal. 1990)   Cited 284 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that failure to make a timely comment does not excuse the lead agency from providing substantial evidence to fulfill its duty to identify and discuss project alternatives

  11. Section 1251 - Congressional declaration of goals and policy

    33 U.S.C. § 1251   Cited 3,541 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Designating the Administrator of the EPA to "administer this chapter"

  12. Section 1531 - Congressional findings and declaration of purposes and policy

    16 U.S.C. § 1531   Cited 1,669 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Finding and declaring that "various species of fish, wildlife, and plants in the United States have been rendered extinct" while "other species ... have been so depleted in numbers that they are in danger of or threatened with extinction ...."

  13. Section 1344 - Permits for dredged or fill material

    33 U.S.C. § 1344   Cited 1,145 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Providing that federal agencies issue permits for navigable waters—defined as those waters used or susceptible to use in interstate commerce

  14. Section 1532 - Definitions

    16 U.S.C. § 1532   Cited 867 times   31 Legal Analyses
    Defining "conservation" as "the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this chapter are no longer necessary"

  15. Section 1538 - Prohibited acts

    16 U.S.C. § 1538   Cited 703 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Defining "take"

  16. Section 1313 - Water quality standards and implementation plans

    33 U.S.C. § 1313   Cited 545 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a State to submit new or revised water regulations for EPA's review

  17. Section 15000 - Authority

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15000   Cited 557 times   13 Legal Analyses

    The regulations contained in this chapter are prescribed by the Secretary for Resources to be followed by all state and local agencies in California in the implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. These Guidelines have been developed by the Office of Planning and Research for adoption by the Secretary for Resources in accordance with Section 2108-3. Additional information may be obtained by writing: SECRETARY FOR RESOURCES ROOM 1311, 1416 NINTH STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 These

  18. Section 17.3 - Definitions

    50 C.F.R. § 17.3   Cited 275 times   11 Legal Analyses
    In 50 C.F.R. § 17.3, petitioner Secretary of the Interior further defines "harm" to include "significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife."

  19. Section 131.38 - Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California

    40 C.F.R. § 131.38   Cited 41 times
    Setting out quality standards for California waters, commonly known as the "California Toxics Rule"

  20. Section 15125 - Environmental Setting

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15125   Cited 32 times   4 Legal Analyses

    (a) An EIR must include a description of the physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project. This environmental setting will normally constitute the baseline physical conditions by which a lead agency determines whether an impact is significant. The description of the environmental setting shall be no longer than is necessary to provide an understanding of the significant effects of the proposed project and its alternatives. The purpose of this requirement is to give the public

  21. Section 15089 - Preparation of Final EIR

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15089   Cited 8 times

    (a) The lead agency shall prepare a final EIR before approving the project. The contents of a final EIR are specified in Section 15132 of these guidelines. (b) Lead agencies may provide an opportunity for review of the final EIR by the public or by commenting agencies before approving the project. The review of a final EIR should focus on the responses to comments on the draft EIR. Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 14, § 15089 1. Change without regulatory effect amending NOTE filed 10-6-2005 pursuant to section

  22. Section 15370 - Mitigation

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15370   Cited 7 times   1 Legal Analyses

    "Mitigation" includes: (a) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. (b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation. (c) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment. (d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action. (e) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources

  23. Section 15064.4 - Determining the Significance of Impacts from Greenhouse Gas Emissions

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15064.4   Cited 5 times   1 Legal Analyses

    (a) The determination of the significance of greenhouse gas emissions calls for a careful judgment by the lead agency consistent with the provisions in section 15064. A lead agency shall make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project. A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to: (1) Quantify greenhouse gas

  24. Section 15052 - Shift in Lead Agency Designation

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15052   Cited 4 times

    (a) Where a responsible agency is called on to grant an approval for a project subject to CEQA for which another public agency was the appropriate lead agency, the responsible agency shall assume the role of the lead agency when any of the following conditions occur: (1) The lead agency did not prepare any environmental documents for the project, and the statute of limitations has expired for a challenge to the action of the appropriate lead agency. (2) The lead agency prepared environmental documents

  25. Section 783.5 - Incidental Take Permit Process

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 783.5   Cited 3 times

    (a) The Director shall review and render a decision regarding incidental take permit applications in accordance with this section. On-site inspections by the Department may be required prior to a final decision by the Director. (b) Initial review. The Department shall complete an initial review of each incidental take permit application within 30 days of receipt. If the Department determines that the application is complete, it shall notify the applicant that the application has been accepted and

  26. Rule 8.1110 - Partial publication

    Cal. R. 8.1110   Cited 2,324 times

    (a)Order for partial publication A majority of the rendering court may certify for publication any part of an opinion meeting a standard for publication under rule 8.1105. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007.) (b) Opinion contents The published part of the opinion must specify the part or parts not certified for publication. All material, factual and legal, including the disposition, that aids in the application or interpretation of the published part must be published. (c) Construction For

  27. Rule 8.1100 - Authority

    Cal. R. 8.1100   Cited 416 times

    The rules governing the publication of appellate opinions are adopted by the Supreme Court under section 14 of article VI of the California Constitution and published in the California Rules of Court at the direction of the Judicial Council. Cal. R. Ct. 8.1100 Rule 8.1100 adopted effective 1/1/2007.

  28. Rule 8.500 - Petition for review

    Cal. R. 8.500   Cited 337 times

    (a)Right to file a petition, answer, or reply (1) A party may file a petition in the Supreme Court for review of any decision of the Court of Appeal, including any interlocutory order, except the denial of a transfer of a case within the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court. (2) A party may file an answer responding to the issues raised in the petition. In the answer, the party may ask the court to address additional issues if it grants review. (3) The petitioner may file a reply to the answer