Land Use,
Government,
Environmental & Energy
Dec. 8, 2022
Capitol Annex ruling illustrates difficulty of applying CEQA
Justice Harry E. Hull Jr. found the designers significantly altered the plans for the building after the environment impact report. The ruling showed that even state appellate justices don’t agree on the law’s meaning. Even after Hull spent 59 pages explaining his reasoning Justice Louis Mauro wrote his own concurring and dissenting opinion.
Lawmakers returned this week to a stark example of the difficulty in applying the California Environmental Quality Act: a complex, split, 63-page, state appellate court opinion throwing a project to rebuild most of the State Capitol building into limbo.
In his majority opinion, Justice Harry E. Hull Jr. found the designers significantly altered the plans for the building after the environment impact report. Justice Stacy Boulware Eurie join...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In