Tahoe Vista Concerned Citizens v. County of Placer
California Court of Appeal
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
NICHOLSON, J.
Plaintiffs challenged the issuance of a conditional use permit, claiming the permit had not undergone sufficient environmental review and violated governing parking regulations. The trial court granted summary judgment against plaintiffs, finding they had failed to exhaust their administrative remedies on the environmental issue and the permit complied with the parking regulations. We affirm.
Undisputed Facts
On or about December 15, 1997, real parties in interest (real parties) applied to defendant County of Placer (County) for a conditional use permit to redevelop a…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Friends of Mammoth v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Ramos v. County of MaderaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- WYDA Associates v. MernerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Coalition for Student Action v. City of FullertonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Peninsula Water Management Dist.California Court of Appeal · 1997
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- North Coast Rivers Alliance v. Marin Municipal Water District Board of DirectorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Citizens for Open Government v. City of LodiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Plantier v. Ramona Mun. Water Dist.California Supreme Court · 2019
- SYNGENTA CORP PROTECTION, INC. v. HellikerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- McAllister v. County of MontereyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.