Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database

Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish and Wildlife

About this case

Filing year
2011
Status
Order issued dismissing all but two appellants from appeal after other appellants reached settlement with respondents.
Docket number
B245131
Court/admin entity
United StatesState CourtsCalifornia Court of Appeals (Cal. Ct. App.)
Case category
State Law Claims (US)Environmentalist Lawsuits (US)State Law Claims (US)State Impact Assessment Laws (US)
Principal law
United StatesCalifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
At issue
Challenge to 12,000-acre development in northwestern Los Angeles County.
Topics
, ,

Documents

Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics 
Beta
Search results
10/20/2017
Order issued dismissing all but two appellants from appeal after other appellants reached settlement with respondents.
Decision
09/22/2017
Settlement agreement reached.
The developers of the Newhall Ranch multi-use development project in northwestern Los Angeles County reached a settlement agreement on September 22, 2017 with groups that had opposed the project to end ongoing litigation and avoid future litigation over the projects. The California Supreme Court ruled in November 2015 that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife lacked substantial evidence to support its conclusion that greenhouse gas emissions associated with the project would not result in a cumulatively significant impact under the California Environmental Quality Act. The settlement agreement indicated that in response to the court’s decision, the developers committed to a “Net Zero Plan” that would, among other things, “result in more than approximately 10,000 solar installations producing approximately 250 million kWh of renewable electricity every year” and “installation of approximately 25,000 electric vehicle chargers within the development and across Los Angeles County, as well as approximately $14 million in subsidies toward the purchase of electric vehicles.”
Settlement Agreement
07/11/2016
Opinion issued.
On remand from the California Supreme Court’s decision finding that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife had not supported its conclusion that the 12,000-acre Newhall Ranch development’s greenhouse gas emissions would not have significant impacts, the California Court of Appeal issued an opinion directing the trial court to take certain actions to direct the course of future environmental review of the project. The appellate court directed the trial court to find that the Department could use State greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals as a significance criterion and could use a hypothetical business-as-usual scenario to evaluate greenhouse gas impacts. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s original finding that there was no substantial evidence that the development’s greenhouse gas emissions would not result in a cumulatively significant environmental impact. The appellate rejected the developer’s argument that it should retain jurisdiction and supervise completion of the environmental review.
Decision
03/20/2014
Opinion issued.
The California Court of Appeal reversed a trial court judgment that had overturned California Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) actions in connection with a 12,000-acre commercial-residential development known as Newhall Ranch in northwestern Los Angeles County. The trial court had held that the environmental impact report (EIR) prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) used a baseline for assessing cumulative impacts of the project’s GHG emissions that was inappropriate as a matter of law. In an unpublished portion of the appellate court’s decision, the court ruled that a substantial evidence standard applied to judicial review of the selection of a baseline, and that substantial evidence supported DFW’s baseline determination as well as its determination regarding the significance of the impacts of the project’s GHG emissions.
Decision

Summary

Challenge to 12,000-acre development in northwestern Los Angeles County.

 Topics mentioned most in this case  
Beta

See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more

Group
Topics
Target
Policy instrument
Risk
Impacted group
Just transition
Renewable energy
Fossil fuel
Greenhouse gas
Economic sector
Adaptation/resilience
Finance