Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

City of Sacramento v. State Water Resources Control Board

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 17, 1992No. Docket Nos. C007450, C007941PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PUGLIA, P. J.—J.—

In this appeal we consider whether annual rice pesticide plans devised by the California Department of Food and Agriculture (DFA) for implementation in California’s Central Valley are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.; hereafter CEQA).

The State Water Resources Control Board (State Board), Regional Water Quality Control Board for the Central Valley Region (Regional Board) and DFA (hereafter collectively defendants) appeal from a judgment of the superior court granting a writ of mandate requiring the Regional Board…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Abelleira v. District Court of AppealCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Wildlife Alive v. ChickeringCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Bozung v. Local Agency Formation CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  4. People Ex Rel. Deukmejian v. County of MendocinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Bullock v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Mountain Lion Foundation v. Fish & Game CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  2. City of Barstow v. Mojave Water AgencyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Planning and Conservation League v. Department of Water ResourcesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  4. Azusa Land Reclamation Co. v. Main San Gabriel Basin WatermasterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
  5. McAllister v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API