Legal Opinion

Citizens Coal. L. A. v. City of L. A.

California Court of Appeal, 5th District

Decided August 23, 2018No. B283480Published

1Opinion of the CourtHoffstadt, J.

A city council passed an ordinance that (1) amended its neighborhood-based "specific plan" to create a new subzone for large commercial development, and (2) placed a half-built Super Target retail store into that new subzone. Two citizens groups attacked the city's ordinance, and the trial court ruled that the city violated *319the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ( Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq. )1 because the city treated the creation of the new subzone as a follow-on to its prior, initial approval of the Target store rather than as a entirely new "project" under CEQA.

This…

2Cases cited74 opinions

  1. Laurel Heights Improvement Ass'n of San Francisco, Inc. v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Thing v. La ChusaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
  3. No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Bozung v. Local Agency Formation CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Amaral v. Cintas Corp. No. 2California Court of Appeal · 2008

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

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

Powered by the Exa API