Legal Opinion
Kaczorowski v. Mendocino County Board of Supervisors
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 17, 2001No. A091318PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KAY, J.
In some situations a proposed project approved by a local governmental entity subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) 1 may be appealed to the California Coastal Commission (Commission). The question presented by this appeal is whether, when such an appeal is taken to the Commission and it is the Commission which, after conducting a de novo proceeding, issues the permit for the project, an administrative mandamus challenge naming the local governmental entity, but not the Commission, is vulnerable to the claim that the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Collier & Wallis, Ltd. v. AstorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- Sierra Club, Inc. v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- San Mateo County Coastal Landowners' Ass'n v. County of San MateoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Ambassador Petroleum Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- REA Enterprises v. California Coastal Zone Conservation CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Feduniak v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- McAllister v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- McAllister v. County of MontereyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Tracy Press, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Citizens for Amending Proposition v. City of Pomona, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.