Legal Opinion
Consolidated Irrigation District v. City of Selma
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 8, 2012No. F061103PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DAWSON, J.
—In this proceeding under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.),1 the trial court granted an irrigation district’s petition for a writ of mandate challenging a city’s use of a mitigated negative declaration in approving a 160-unit, 44-acre residential development.
The city appealed, arguing that the trial court erred by (1) concluding the irrigation district had standing to pursue this CEQA proceeding, (2) augmenting the record of proceedings with documents that were not submitted to the *191city, (3) concluding the irrigation…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- In Re Marriage of MixCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011
- Santiago County Water District v. County of OrangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
- The Pocket Protectors v. City of SacramentoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Porterville Citizens for Responsible Hillside Development v. City of PortervilleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Consolidated Irrigation District v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- People ex rel. Feuer v. Superior Court of Los Angeles CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- Soc'y v. Cnty. of El Dorado, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Foster v. BrittonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- Inzana v. Turlock Irrigation Dist. Bd. of Dirs., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.