|
- Boundaries -
All extrinsic evidence that is relevant to prove the parties' mutual intention is admissible; if extrinsic evidence is relevant to prove the meaning of an ambiguous judgment, that evidence is admissible whether or not it was part of the record in that case. Where extrinsic evidence shows that there were both artificial improvements and artificial fill in the immediate vicinity of properties owned by a group of plaintiffs, the artificial accretions rule applies to support an interpretation that a prior judgment against their predecessor-in-interest fixed the boundary of their properties.
SLPR, L.L.C. v. San Diego Unified Port District - filed May 22, 2020, Fourth District, Div. One
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 2296
Full text click here >
- CEQA -
There is no blanket prohibition on using carbon offsets to mitigate greenhouse emissions, but a greenhouse gas mitigation measure allowing certain projects to mitigate their in-county emissions by purchasing carbon offsets did not comply with the California Environmental Quality Act where the measure contained unenforceable performance standards and improperly defers mitigation. A supplemental environmental impact report violates CEQA when its discussion of cumulative impacts ignores foreseeable impacts from probable future projects, its finding of consistency with a regional transportation plan is not supported by substantial evidence, and the analysis of alternatives ignores a smart-growth alternative.
Golden Door Properties, LLC v. County of San Diego - filed June 12, 2020, Fourth District, Div. One
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 2803
Full text click here >
California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines §15162(c) applies only when, after the original approval of a project, a further discretionary approval on that project is required; a city’s post-approval actions implementing a project did not constitute an approval within the meaning of §15162(c).
Willow Glen Trestle Conservancy v. City of San Jose - filed May 18, 2020, Sixth District
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 2408
Full text click here >
- Clean Air Act -
Federal Clean Air Act expressly preempts state and local government efforts to apply laws against tampering with automobile emission control systems prior to sale, but does not bar enforcement by such governmental entities of regulations against tampering with post-sale vehicles.
In re Volkswagen - filed June 1, 2020
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 18-15937
Full text click here >
- Development -
When a local agency approves a vesting tentative map or enters into a development agreement, the builder is entitled to proceed on the project under the local rules, regulations, and ordinances in effect at the time of the approval. However, a subsequent development agreement extending the term of the vesting tentative map can alter the builder’s vested rights under the vesting tentative map.
North Murrieta Community, LLC v. City of Murrieta - filed June 8, 2020, Fourth District, Div. Two
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 2659
Full text click here >
- EPA -
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act provides two requirements for conditional amendment of an existing registration; first, the Environmental Protection Agency must determine the applicant has submitted satisfactory data pertaining to the proposed conditional registrations, and second, it must find the amendment will not significantly increase the risk of any unreasonable adverse effect on the environment.
National Family Farm Coalition v. United States Environmental Protection Agency - filed June 3, 2020
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 19-70115
Full text click here >
- Landlord Tenant -
The prohibition on arbitration agreements in residential lease or rental agreements applies to tenancy provisions in a continuing care retirement community.
Harris v. University Village Thousand Oaks, CCRC, LLC - filed June 1, 2020, Second District, Div. Six
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 2529
Full text click here >
When the owner of a single-family home rents bedrooms in the home to separate tenants, the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act does not exempt each of the tenants’ rooms from local rent control even though the home is considered an exempt dwelling.
Owens v. City of Oakland Housing, Residential Rent and Relocation Board (Barghout) - filed May 29, 2020, First District, Div. Three
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 2532
Full text click here >
Modification
People v. Son - filed May 29, 2020, Fifth District
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 2535
Full text click here >
- Zoning -
A defendant could not assert a viable double jeopardy claim where he could not prove the conduct at issue in a criminal complaint constituted the same offense as the conduct at issue in a civil complaint. A trial court could reasonably infer that a defendant had the financial ability to pay the $6 million civil penalties assessed against him based on the evidence he controlled a substantial amount of commercial and residential real estate in Los Angeles County. The medical-marijuana regulations for the City of Los Angeles are neither vague nor uncertain. An individual defendant can be held personally at-fault for zoning and Health and Safety Code violations at a property owned by a trust where he intentionally allowed the unlawful uses to continue despite notice and demand that they cease, and because his conduct in response to the notices, demands, and civil actions rose to the level of negligent disregard of the ongoing violations.
People v. Braum - filed April 22, 2020, publication ordered May 22, 2020, Second District, Div. Five
Cite as 2020 S.O.S. 2286
Full text click here >
|