Motion-Secondary: Patty Johnson; Joe Teixeira; Omar Ahmed; Xin Guo; and Carolyn...

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                1   BRIGIT S. BARNES & ASSOCIATES, INC.
     BRIGIT S. BARNES, ESQ. CSB #122673
 2   ANNIE R. EMBREE, ESQ., OF COUNSEL CSB #208591
 3   3262 Penryn Road, Suite 200
     Loomis, CA 95650
 4   Telephone: (916) 660-9555
     Facsimile: (916)660-9554
 5
     Attomeys for Petitioners and Plaintiffs
 6   PATTY JOHNSON; JOE TEDCEIRA;
 7   OMAR AHMED, JR.; XIN GUO; and
     CAROLYN SOARES
 8
 9                                  SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNL\
10
                                        COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
11
12
     PATTY JOHNSON; JOE TEIXEIRA;                      CASE NO. 34-2016-80002493
13   OMAR AHMED, JR.; XIN GUO;
     and CAROLYN SOARES,                               [PROPOSED] ORDER OVERRULING
14                                                     REAL PARTIES IN INTEREST'S
                                                       DEMURRER TO VERIFIED AMENDED
15                Petitioners and Plaintiffs,          PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE
                                                       AND COMPLAINT FOR
16                                                     DECLARATORY R E L I E F
     CITY OF ELK GROVE,
17                                                     Date: June 2,2017
                                                       Time: 11:00 a.m.
                 Respondent and Defendant.             Department: 24
18
                                                       Judge: Hon. Shelleyanne W.L. Chang
19   ELK GROVE TOWN CENTER, LP;
     HOWARD HUGHES CORPORATION; and
20   DOES 1-20, inclusive,                             Action Filed: November 23, 2017
                                                       Trial Date: Not Set
21               Real Parties in Interest and
22               Defendants.
                                                                                       BY FAX
23
24
             The demurrer of Real Parties in Interest/Defendants ELK GROVE TOWN CENTER, LP
25
     and HOWARD HUGHS CORPORATION ("Real Parties/Defendants") to the Verified Amended
26
     Petition-Complaint of Petitioners/Plaintiffs having come on regularly to be heard before the
           on June 2, 2017, in Department 24 of the Court, and the matter having been fully presented

        ml
       "07        [PROPOSED] ORDER OVERRULING REAL PARTIES IN INTEREST'S DEMURRER TO
                                   AMENDED PETITION-COMPLAINT -1
 1   and submitted, and the Court being ofthe opinion that Real Parties/Defendants' demurrer is not
 2   well taken and should be overruled as follows:
 3       1. The demurrer to the entire Amended Petition-Complaint should be overruled as this
            Court retains jurisdiction over the matters alleged therein and the claims are not moot by
 4          virtue of the appeal filed against the Department of the Interior's land-to trust decision.
 5
         2. The demurrer should be overruled as to the First Cause of Action City Breach of Zoning
 6          Ordinance because Petitioners have properly alleged citizen rights to require City to
            enforce the Lent Ranch SPA, and to the extent that Real Parties are alleged to have
 7          participated in efforts to evade application ofthe restrictions in the SPA to the Phase 2
            property, those allegations are properly plead against Real Parties.
 8
 9       3. The demurrer should be overruled as to the Second Cause of Action Breach of 2014
            Development Agreement as Petitioners have adequately alleged the existence of the
10          2014 Development Agreement, attached a copy ofthe Agreement, and the Real Parties in
            Interest were parties to the Agreement who breached it by failing to request a hearing
11          regarding the transfer as required.
12
        4. The demurrer should be overruled as to the Third Cause of Action City Breach of PRC §
13         2108L6, Enforcement per §§21166 and 21167 as Petitioners have adequately alleged
           that Real Parties have participated with City in a series of actions to hide Real Parties'
14         intention to transfer portions of the Mall Site A to Boyd and the Tribe, datingfromat
           least 2014, and that such efforts were intended to avoid any land use and eiivironmental
15         reviews of the approvals sought by Real Parties in beginning in 2014. As such. Real
           Parties would meet the definition of recipient of approvals, as used in Public Resources
16
           Code §21167.6.5.
17
        5. The demurrer should be overruled as to the Fourth Cause of Action Breach of Govt
18         Code Hearing and Notice Provisions §65020(b), Procedural Due Process Rights as
           Petitioners have adequately alleged that Real Parties cooperated with City in substantially
19         revising development designs, circulation patterns, andfinancingagreements without
20         notice to the public.

21      6. The demurrer should be overruled as to the Fifth Cause of Action Declaratory Relief as
           Petitioners have adequately alleged the existence of a current controversy between the
22         Parties relating to the required hearings imder the 2014 Development Agreement
23         requiring a judicial declaration of rights.

24          IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

25          1.      Real Parties in Interest's demurrer tp the Amended Petition-Complaint is
26   overruled as set forth above.
27          2.      Real Parties in Interest are to file their answers on the Amended Petition-
28   Complaint within         days from the date of this order.

                  [PROPOSED] ORDER OVERRULING REAL PARTIES IN INTEREST'S DEMURRER TO
                                    AMENDED PETITION-COMPLAINT - 2
 1          3.     Real Parties in Interest are to pay to Petitioners/Plaintiffs $    as costs
 2   on the demurrer.
 3
 4 Dated:                     ,2017
                                                  JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

                 [PROPOSED] ORDER OVERRULING REAL PARTIES IN INTEREST'S DEMURRER TO
                                  AMENDED PETITION-COMPLAINT - 3