Photo of William W. Abbott

William W. Abbott is Of Counsel in Abbott & Kindermann, Inc., a Sacramento-based law firm focusing on land use issues.  Mr. Abbott’s clients include public agencies, private developers, and property owners concerned with real estate development throughout California.  A long time instructor in land use law, Mr. Abbott also serves as an expert witness on California land use proceedings in state and federal court.

Mr. Abbott has also participated in numerous training programs for local planning departments, County Supervisors Association of California, League of California Cities, and the County Planning Directors’ Association.

Practice Areas:

  • Land use and planning law
  • Real estate law
  • Local government
  • CEQA, NEPA

Education:

  • J.D., University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law, 1978
  • B.A., University of California at Davis, 1974

Sam v. Kwan (2024) 101 Cal. App. 5th 556.

The California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District reversed a trial court’s decision in a real estate case of breach of fiduciary duty between two partners of an LLC. The case demonstrates that the bona fide purchaser doctrine will not protect a third-party buying the property

In AIDS Healthcare Foundation v. Bonta (2024) 101 Cal.App.5th 73, the Second District Court of Appeal upheld the power of local governments to override housing density caps, including caps adopted by voter initiative.

Legal Background

Under Senate Bill 10 (“SB 10”), passed in 2021, the Legislature granted counties and cities discretion on

In Move Eden Housing v. City of Livermore (2024) 100 Cal.App.5th 263, the First District Court of Appeal held the Livermore City Council’s adoption of a resolution approving a development agreement was a legislative act subject to the referendum power.  This case is the latest iteration of a multi-year litigation battle targeting an affordable

In Discovery Builders, Inc. v. City of Oakland (2023) 92 Cal.App.5th 799, the First District Court of Appeal held an agreement between a developer and the City of Oakland was unenforceable to the extent it prevented the city from imposing new impact fees in the future. The court reasoned such a provision constituted an

First District Holds Neighbor is Not Eligible for Anti-SLAAP Relief Because His Conduct, Though Central to the Dispute, Did Not Form Basis For Writ of Mandate Petition
Continue Reading First District Holds Neighbor is Not Eligible for Anti-SLAAP Relief Because His Conduct, Though Central to the Dispute, Did Not Form Basis For Writ of Mandate Petition

The Claremont Canyon Conservancy v. Regents of the University of California (2023) 92 Cal.App.5th 474.

The Regents certified an EIR for a project aimed at reducing wildfire risk at UC Berkeley’s Hill Campus, located in the East Bay Hills.  Environmental organizations filed suit, contending, relevant here, that the EIR included an inadequate project description.  The

(United Neighborhoods for Los Angeles v. City of Los Angeles (2023) 93 Cal.App.5th 1074)

CEQA’s infill exemption (Guidelines section 15332) is a very useful tool in the toolbox for streamlining CEQA review.  This Guideline applies in cities and can be applied to sites up to five acres in size if substantially surrounded by urban development. 

(Anderson v. County of Santa Barbara (2023) 94 Cal.App.5th 554.)

It is not unusual in the non-urban parts of California for a property owner to install landscaping within a county right-of-way without ever securing an encroachment permit.  In Santa Barbara County, like many jurisdictions, installing these improvements without County approval can be treated as a

Emerging Issues in Evaluating Wildfire Impacts under CEQA: A Resource Guide
Continue Reading Emerging Issues in Evaluating Wildfire Impacts under CEQA: A Resource Guide (Updated November 2023)

Like A Phoenix Rising, A Recorded 1869 Subdivision Map Forms A Partial Foundation To Support The Creation Of Separate Legal Parcels In Later Transactions
Continue Reading Like A Phoenix Rising, A Recorded 1869 Subdivision Map Forms A Partial Foundation To Support The Creation Of Separate Legal Parcels In Later Transactions (Updated November 2023)