But Berkeley neighbors lose two other cases in the appellate court -- one dealing with student enrollment levels and the other dealing with a different aspect of the People's Park development.

The city claimed that because the entire 8,800-square-foot property had been conveyed as one more than 75 years ago, the original 25-foot-wide parcels from 1851 were not legal. An appellate court disagreed.

Appellate court says overlay zone doesn't meet state's minimum density requirements because underlying zoning allows less -- and as a result discrimination laws were violated as well. 

City makes novel arguments like violation of First Amendment and Commerce Clause, but also argues that its charter city rights are violated and the relationship between the RHNA and CEQA puts it in an untenable position.

Appellate court shoots down a litany of CEQA arguments, finding fault only with wind impacts. But the stadium's sponsors are still looking for more funding for infrastructure.

Palo Alto claimed that in in-lieu downtown parking fee wasn't really a fee under the Mitigation Fee Act. But an appellate court ruled the other way -- and now Palo Alto developer Chop Keenan stands get almost $1 million back.

An Encinitas bluffside homeowner wanted to build a new house with a basement. The Local Coastal Plan says all structures must be removable in case of further erosion. The homeowner said the basement was removable; the Coastal Commission disagreed. Guess who won?

Two years ago, an appellate panel ruled that the controversial housing proposal should have been processed under SB 35 -- the first major ruling. Now the court has ruled that a local judge had the authority to rule on Housing Accountability Act violations as well.

In a very strongly worded opinion, a Los Angeles appellate court shot down all the neighbors' arguments about an eldercare facility in Pacific Palisades -- and, in the process, reiterated that the role of the courts is to defer to the city’s judgment when substantial evidence exists and not "re-weigh the evidence". 

An EIR from Grass Valley failed because the project would put multifamily units 170 feet from a state highway and the city didn't analyze the air pollution impact.

In an indication of the increasingly acrimonious nature of land-use disputes, a prominent San Diego land-use lobbyist and a community activist opposed to a church project sued each other for libel. The activist then filed an anti-SLAPP suit -- which was not successful. Now the lobbyist can move forward with the libel suit.

26-foot statue in the middle of a street in Palm Springs also violates the state's Motor Vehicle Code, an appellate ocurt rules.

Final ruling in People's Park case turns around on one issue and softens the argument on the other -- but prompts Newsom to vow CEQA reform.

In an acrimonious case about water rights, an appellate court strikes down the "Weed Nine's" malicious prosecution argument.