Legal Digest

If a city rejects a builder's remedy application as incomplete, is that the end of the story? Or does the applicant have multiple 90-day opportunities to comply? Several Silicon Valley lawsuits have been filed seeking the resolve the question.

Appellate court rules that SB 743 requires more evidence than just putting forth the assumption that VMT will be low in infill situations.

Though the city did include some mitigation measures regarding tribal cultural resources, it did not "conclude" the consultation as required by aB 52, according to an appellate court.

Judge rules that Housing Accountability Act bond requirement applies in dispute over builder's remedy case even though the developer is not the plaintiff in the case.

Judge rules that the city's decision not to enforce its moratorium on shelters and supportive housing doesn't make the lawsuit either moot or unripe.

Court declines to knock out a second permit applicant that was in close proximity to the proposed dispensary

<p>Overturning a lower court, the California Supreme Court ruled that because the 19th Century "lot" had never been conveyed separately from other "lots" on the parcel, it cannot be viewed as a separate parcel under the Subdivision Map Act.</p>

Allowing emergency, maintenance, and delivery vehicles doesn't constitute a "partial" close under the Streets & Highways Law.

In a provocative ruling, an appellate court said that because federal law makes marijuana illegal, Santa Barbara County's approval of an easement to permit transportation of the substance cannot stand.

The latest legal news in short bursts: Coastal Commission can't allow seawalls on projects built after 1976, ED1 revisions don't apply prospectively, and La Cañada Flintridge housing element appeal is moot.

Appellate court rejected the idea that the hotel is too tall but agreed that fire protection is lacking.

Reversing a trial judge, an appellate court ruled that a seawall can be built to protect an apartment complex built in 1972 -- but not an adjacent condo building built in 1984, eight years after the Coastal Act was passed.