In addition to advising clients on strategies for complying with NEPA and CEQA, we represent clients in court when they must defend their record of compliance, or when it is necessary to challenge NEPA or CEQA non-compliance by their adversaries. NEPA and CEQA cases we have handled, in all phases of litigation through final and appeal, range from challenges to development projects to challenges to regulatory action.
We also represent a variety of clients in litigation involving compliance with laws regarding protection of natural resources (including wetlands laws and regulations) and the Endangered Species Act.
EXPERIENCE
- Developer. Represented developer in the development and defense of environmental impact reports (EIRs) and negative declarations prepared under CEQA.
- Water Company. Represented privately owned water company in CEQA challenge to $600 million wastewater, stormwater, and water service contract. The challenge concerned timing of CEQA review, and raised new questions of law regarding the application of Government Code section 5956 et seq. to the City contract.
- School District. Represented respondent school district in CEQA litigation, including successful appeal of attorney’s fee award in Court of Appeal and California Supreme Court. The case involved multiple challenges to a mitigated negative declaration and subsequent environmental impact report for a proposed new school project.
- Developer. Represented a developer in litigation where a public interest unincorporated association filed a CEQA action, challenging entitlements for a 1,200 acre multi-use project in Santa Clarita. The CEQA litigation settled pursuant to a settlement agreement that was approved by the Court under C.C.P. § 664.6. The plaintiff failed to perform the settlement agreement, holding up the recordation of the final maps. We filed a motion to enforce the settlement, and prevailed.
- Developer. Represented a developer regarding U.S. Army Corps' jurisdiction over wetlands.
- Property Owners. Represented group of owners seeking annexation to a Northern California city and the development of their properties. Critical legal issues/tasks involved included Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, Williamson Act, new Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) law and Measure D (slow-growth initiative adopted by Alameda County electorate), two CEQA lawsuits and one LAFCO lawsuit; and Development Agreements.
- Polo Club. Represented owner of private polo club in Clean Water Act citizens suit alleging violations of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation stormwater regulations.
- Real Party. Represented real party in interest developer in CEQA litigation. Issues addressed included adequacy of the environmental impact report, and the County's standing. A favorable settlement was reached for the client.
- School District. Represented respondent school district in CEQA litigation, including challenge to environmental impact report for a proposed new school project. Obtained a favorable settlement for the client.
- City. Represented City in multi-million suit for conditions imposed on plaintiff's development project through demurrer. Separately represented City in CEQA litigation filed by developer the City's imposition of a Supplemental EIR on the project.
- Developer. Represented developer in challenge to City denial of project entitlements, including successful appeal of dismissal on demurrer. The issues include the City's ministerial duty to approve the final maps for the project, and the validity of the Coastal Development Permit for the project.
- Developer. Represented developer in lawsuits brought by growth opponents involving CEQA, Planning and Zoning Law, and Historic Preservation issues.
- Developer. Represented developer clients in CEQA and related actions challenging development project. Issues concerned the adequacy of the water supply assessment for the project. A favorable settlement was reached for the client.
- Irrigation District. Represented irrigation district in defending allegations of CEQA violations in connection with agreement to transfer conserved Colorado River to Southern California coastal areas from the Imperial Valley.
- Irrigation District. Represented irrigation district in action alleging CEQA violations in adoption of policies and rules for equitable distribution of water supplies in the Imperial Valley amongst agricultural, industrial and municipal users in years of water shortage.
- Irrigation District. Represented irrigation district in NEPA and Clean Air Act challenge to federal opponents of agreement enclosing large water transfers.
- Developer. Represented developer clients in CEQA and related actions challenging development project.
Related Services
