- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- San Francisco Taxi Coalition v. City & County of S...
Collection
San Francisco Taxi Coalition v. City & County of San Francisco
San Francisco Taxi Coalition v. City & County of San Francisco ↗
3:19-cv-01972N.D. Cal., United States Federal Courts4 entries
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
06/20/2019
Decision
City's motion for judgment on the pleadings granted.
The court granted the City's motion for judgment on the pleadings. On the California Environmental Quality Act claim, the court rejected the plaintiff's theory that taxis would drive to the airport without passengers, and that other types of medallion holders would return to the city without passengers, resulting in increased emissions. The court said the concerns were "too speculative or unlikely to be considered reasonably foreseeable."
San Francisco Taxi Coalition v. City & County of San Francisco ↗
CGC-19-574503Cal. Super. Ct.1 entry
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
03/13/2019
Complaint
Complaint filed.
Plaintiffs challenged new regulations concerning what types of taxis could pick up fares at the airport. The plaintiffs' claims included a California Environmental Quality Act claim largely based on the plaintiffs' allegations that the new regulations would increase the trips to and from the airport by taxicabs and thereby increase vehicle emissions, including greenhouse gas emissions.
San Francisco Taxi Coalition v. City & County of San Francisco ↗
19-16439United States Federal Courts, United States Ninth Circuit (9th Cir.)3 entries
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
11/09/2020
Decision
District court’s judgment on the pleadings in favor of defendants affirmed.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court judgment rejecting challenges to San Francisco regulations that dictated which taxi medallion holders could pick up passengers at San Francisco International Airport. Like the district court, the Ninth Circuit rejected an argument that the regulations were a “project” subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the rules could impact the environment by increasing “deadhead” trips to and from the airport. The Ninth Circuit found that the complaint “has not plausibly alleged that the 2018 Regulations increase the number of taxis in circulation or authorize more fares.”