Legal Opinion
Residents Against Specific Plan 380 v. County of Riverside
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 14, 2017No. E063292PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SLOUGH, J.
—Plaintiff Residents Against Specific Plan 380 (appellant) appeals from a judgment denying its petition for a writ of mandate challenging the decision of the County of Riverside (County) to approve development of a master-planned community put forward as Specific Plan 380 by real party in interest, Hanna Marital Trust.
The County commissioned an environmental impact report (EIR) on the project, which determined all potentially significant environmental impacts except noise and air quality impacts would be reduced below the level of significance after mitigation. The final EIR…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Laurel Heights Improvement Ass'n of San Francisco, Inc. v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho CordovaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- Laurel Heights Improvement Ass'n of San Francisco, Inc. v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Save Our Peninsula Committee v. Monterey County Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Committee for Green Foothills v. Santa Clara County Bd. of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Citizens for Positive Growth & Preservation v. City of Sacramento CA3California Court of Appeal · 2021
- East Oakland Stadium Alliance, LLC v. City of OaklandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2023
- King and Gardiner Farms, LLC v. County of KernCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
- King and Gardiner Farms, LLC v. County of KernCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
- People v. Williams CA4/2California Court of Appeal · 2020
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.