Bowman v. City of Petaluma
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CHANNELL, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment in mandamus requiring the City of Petaluma (City) to set aside certain enactments approving a subdivision development. We hold that (1) the trial court erred by extending review of the City’s actions beyond the question whether they were supported by substantial evidence; and (2) analyzed by this standard, the City’s actions did not violate the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.).
I
Since 1980 appellant Daon Corporation (Daon) has owned approximately 151 contiguous acres of unimproved property on…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Bixby v. PiernoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Friends Of" B" Street v. City of HaywardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- Lewin v. St. Joseph Hospital of OrangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Rural Landowners Assn. v. City CouncilCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by58 opinions
- Laurel Heights Improvement Ass'n of San Francisco, Inc. v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- Western States Petroleum Assn. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
- Laurel Heights Improvement Ass'n of San Francisco, Inc. v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Committee for Green Foothills v. Santa Clara County Bd. of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.