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 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 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.
(Martinez v. City of Clovis (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 193)
The California Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District affirmed the trial court’s ruling that City of Clovis (the “City”) did not substantially comply with the Housing Element Law (“Housing Element Law”).[1] In order to come into compliance with the Housing Element statute, the
Cal. Restaurant Ass’n v. City of Berkeley (2023) 65 F.4th 1045.
In the continued effort by cities to require all-electric infrastructure in new buildings, the City of Berkeley (“Berkeley”) adopted an ordinance that prohibited, with some exceptions, natural gas infrastructure in newly constructed buildings (“Ordinance”). Congress adopted the Energy Policy and
Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. County of Monterey
California’s oil and gas operations are governed by Division 3 of the Public Resources Code (§ 3000 et seq.) and its implementing regulations (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 1712 et seq.). Division 3 addresses various aspects of oil and gas exploration and extraction, including notices of intent
Two Of Its Attorneys Have Been Chosen For The 2023 California Super Lawyers List
Continue Reading Abbott & Kindermann, Inc. Is Pleased To Announce That Two Of Its Attorneys Have Been Chosen For The 2023 California Super Lawyers List
