Reserve your seat for our annual conference taking place in early 2022 for our virtual program.

On March 17-18, 2022, Abbott & Kindermann, Inc. will present its 21st annual virtual educational program for clients and colleagues interested in current land use, environmental, and real estate issues affecting commercial and residential development, agriculture, real estate transactions,

Reserve your seat for our annual conference taking place in early 2022 for our virtual program.

On March 17-18, 2022, Abbott & Kindermann, Inc. will present its 21st annual virtual educational program for clients and colleagues interested in current land use, environmental, and real estate issues affecting commercial and residential development, agriculture, real estate transactions,

Reserve your seat for our annual conference taking place in early 2022 for our virtual program.

On March 17-18, 2022, Abbott & Kindermann, Inc. will present its 21st annual virtual educational program for clients and colleagues interested in current land use, environmental, and real estate issues affecting commercial and residential development, agriculture, real estate transactions,

Reserve your seat for our annual conference taking place in early 2022 for our virtual program.

On March 17-18, 2022, Abbott & Kindermann, Inc. will present its 21st annual virtual educational program for clients and colleagues interested in current land use, environmental, and real estate issues affecting commercial and residential development, agriculture, real estate transactions,

Reserve your seat for our annual conference taking place in early 2022 for our virtual program.

On March 17-18, 2022, Abbott & Kindermann, Inc. will present its 21st annual virtual educational program for clients and colleagues interested in current land use, environmental, and real estate issues affecting commercial and residential development, agriculture, real estate transactions,

Welcome to Abbott & Kindermann, Inc.’s May Environmental Action News. This summary provides brief updates on recent environmental cases, legislation, and administrative actions beginning in January 2020.

1. PREVIOUS MONTH’S UPDATE

To read the April 2020 Environmental Action News post, click here: https://blog.aklandlaw.com/2020/04/articles/ak-news/land-use-law-blog-april-environmental-action-news/ .

2. CASES PENDING AT THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT

There is one

Delta Stewardship Council Cases (Cal.Ct.App., April 10, 2020, cases nos. C082944, C086199) 2020 Cal.App.Unpub.LEXIS 2279.

In an unpublished decision, the Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District affirmed the trial court’s ruling that reduced the amount in attorney’s fees a plaintiff could collect under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5 after prevailing on only

By: Brian Russell

Save Our Uniquely Rural Community Environment v. County of San Bernardino (March 18, 2015, E059524) ___Cal.App.4th ___.

Plaintiff and appellant Save Our Uniquely Rural Community Environment (SOURCE) appealed an award of attorney fees in a case arising under CEQA. It contended that the trial court abused its discretion when it awarded $19,176, despite SOURCE’s request for $231,098.

Continue Reading California Courts Are Provided Broad Discretion When Awarding “Reasonable” Legal Fees Under CEQA

By Glen Hansen

In Garcia v. Governing Board of Bellflower Unified School District (October 24, 2013, B247320) ___ Cal.App.4th ___ a former employee of the Bellflower Unified School District (“District”) filed an extraordinary writ petition against the District relating to her alleged exposure to mold. Her counsel later served on the District’s counsel in that proceeding a request for records from the District pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code, § 6250 et seq.) (“PRA”). The letter listed eight (8) categories of records that were requested pursuant to the PRA. During the next month, the former employee’s counsel sent several additional letters and an email to the District’s counsel because the District did not respond to the original letter request. The District’s general counsel finally responded with a letter stating that there were no documents responsive to four of the requests, that two of the requests were overly broad and vague, and that documents responsive to two of the requests were exempt from disclosure. The former employee’s counsel then sent a ‘meet and confer’ letter to the District’s general counsel disputing the District’s objections and responses. But when the District did not respond to that letter, the former employee commenced mandamus proceeding seeking to compel the District to comply with the PRA. 

Continue Reading A Petitioner Is Entitled To Attorneys’ Fees Under The Public Records Act If The Petitioner Succeeds On Any Significant Issue And Achieves Some Of The Benefit Sought In The Litigation

Public agencies looking to appeal the merits of an adverse judgment and writ of mandate have to be careful about not taking actions which render the lawsuit moot. Awards of attorney’s fees under the private attorney general doctrine are not likely to be reversed on appeal.
Continue Reading Compliance with Trial Court Writ Renders Moot an Appeal on the Merits