California Laws|Section 21168.9.

                                                

21168.9.  

(a) If a court finds, as a result of a trial, hearing, or remand from an appellate court, that any determination, finding, or decision of a public agency has been made without compliance with this division, the court shall enter an order that includes one or more of the following:

(1) A mandate that the determination, finding, or decision be voided by the public agency, in whole or in part.

(2) If the court finds that a specific project activity or activities will prejudice the consideration or implementation of particular mitigation measures or alternatives to the project, a mandate that the public agency and any real parties in interest suspend any or all specific project activity or activities, pursuant to the determination, finding, or decision, that could result in an adverse change or alteration to the physical environment, until the public agency has taken any actions that may be necessary to bring the determination, finding, or decision into compliance with this division.

(3) A mandate that the public agency take specific action as may be necessary to bring the determination, finding, or decision into compliance with this division.

(b) Any order pursuant to subdivision (a) shall include only those mandates which are necessary to achieve compliance with this division and only those specific project activities in noncompliance with this division. The order shall be made by the issuance of a peremptory writ of mandate specifying what action by the public agency is necessary to comply with this division. However, the order shall be limited to that portion of a determination, finding, or decision or the specific project activity or activities found to be in noncompliance only if a court finds that (1) the portion or specific project activity or activities are severable, (2) severance will not prejudice complete and full compliance with this division, and (3) the court has not found the remainder of the project to be in noncompliance with this division. The trial court shall retain jurisdiction over the public agency’s proceedings by way of a return to the peremptory writ until the court has determined that the public agency has complied with this division.

(c) Nothing in this section authorizes a court to direct any public agency to exercise its discretion in any particular way. Except as expressly provided in this section, nothing in this section is intended to limit the equitable powers of the court.

(Amended by Stats. 1993, Ch. 1131, Sec. 9. Effective January 1, 1994.)

View Latest Rulings

Resources Code section 21168.9 (section 21168.9), subd. (a)(1). However, as applied here, section 21168.9, subdivision (a)(1), would result in the 2022 Raw Approval, 2022 Addendum, or 2022 Motion being voided, not the initial approval. Similarly, section 21168.9, subdivision (a)(3), does not provide an avenue for Petitioner to pause the entire Project. However, section 21168.9 does provide a possible vehicle for the relief Petitioner seeks in this motion.

  • Name

    LINCOLN HEIGHTS COMMUNITY COALITION VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES, ET AL.

  • Case No.

    22STCP01636

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2023

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

Applicable Law Public Resource Code[2] section 21168.9 grants the court wide discretion to fashion a remedy when granting a writ in a CEQA case. Golden Gate Land Holdings v. East Bay Reg’l Park Dist., (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 353, 372.

  • Name

    LYDIA PONCE VS. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, ET AL

  • Case No.

    BS169426

  • Hearing

    Nov 13, 2018

After a court issues a peremptory writ of mandate in accordance with Public Resources Code section 21168.9, the trial court retains jurisdiction over the public agency's proceedings by way of a return to the peremptory writ until the court has determined that the public agency has complied with this division. (Pub. Resources Code § 21168.9, subd. (b); Sierra Club v.

  • Name

    JOHN R. LAWSON ROCK VS. CALIFORNIA AIR/CEQA

  • Case No.

    14CECG01494

  • Hearing

    Aug 20, 2018

  • Judge

    Rosie McGuire

  • County

    Fresno County, CA

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

The judgment in this case states that “[t]he Court exercises its equitable discretion under Section 21168.9 to allow, and issues no injunction preventing, the construction of the Project to proceed during the Respondents' performance of actions taken to comply with the writ of mandate.” (Judgment at 3.)

  • Name

    COMMUNITIES FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT VS. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA

  • Case No.

    N22-1080

  • Hearing

    Oct 12, 2023

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

(Public Resources Code section 21168.9(b); Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife (2016) 1 Cal.App.5th 452, 467.) Assessing obedience with the writ generally requires a review of CEQA requirements, principles, and policies to determine whether there is compliance with CEQA to support discharge of the writ. (see c.f. POET, LLC v. State Air Resources Board (2017) 12 Cal.App.5th 52, 86.)

  • Name

    CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE GROWTH V. TOWN OF LOOMIS

  • Case No.

    S-CV-0045539

  • Hearing

    Aug 04, 2022

  • County

    Placer County, CA

View More Rulings

View Latest Dockets

Filed

Jul 15, 2010

Status

Appealed

Court

Norwalk Courthouse

County

Los Angeles County, CA

Category

Writ - Other Limited Court Case Review (General Jurisdiction)

Filed

Feb 13, 2009

Status

Dismissal

Judge

Hon. Michael P. Kenny Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for Michael P. Kenny

Court

Sacramento County

County

Sacramento County, CA

Category

Writ of Mandate

Filed

Jan 07, 2008

Status

Judgment on Appeal

Judge

Hon. Raymond M. Cadei Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for Raymond M. Cadei

Court

Sacramento County

County

Sacramento County, CA

Category

Writ of Mandate

Filed

Aug 04, 2011

Status

Appealed

Court

Kern County

County

Kern County, CA

Filed

Jul 28, 2005

Status

Dismissal

Judge

Hon. Leslie C. Nichols Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for Leslie C. Nichols

Court

Santa Clara

County

Santa Clara County, CA

Category

Writ of Mandate Unlimited (02)

View More Dockets
Previous Section

Doc thumbnail Section 21168.7.

Next Section

Doc thumbnail Section 21169.

View Latest Documents

preview-icon 3 pages

1 MICHAEL N. FEUER, City Attorney (SBN 111529) Exempt from Filing Fees JULIE C. RILEY, Interim General Counsel Water (Gov’t Code § 6103) 2 and Power (SBN 197407) MELANIE A. TORY, Deputy City Attorney (SBN 252387) 3 221 N. Figueroa Street, Suite 1000 …

Case Filed

Jun 20, 2018

Case Status

Appeal

County

Kern County, CA

Filed Date

Aug 05, 2022

preview-icon 17 pages

EMT SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Oct-09-2013 02:39 pm Case Number: CPF-05-505509 Filing Date: Oct-09-2013 02:38 pm Filed by: ANNA TORRES Juke Box: 001 Image: 04232565 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES COALITION FOR ADEQUATE REVIEW VS. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO et al 001004232565 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned. ItBR Bw N le oOo IN Dw 10 WW 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 2…

County

San Francisco County, CA

Filed Date

Oct 09, 2013

Category

WRITS OF MANDATE OR PROH., CERTI., ETC./ADMIN. AGEN

Judge Hon. Rochelle C. East Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for Rochelle C. East
preview-icon 8 pages

1 Brian Gaffney (CBN 168778) LAW OFFICES OF BRIAN GAFFNEY APC 2 2370 Market Street, Suite 103-318 San Francisco, CA 94114 3 Tel: (650) 219 3187 brian@gaffneylegal.com 4 Richard Drury (CBN 163559) 5 Rebecca Davis (CBN 271662) LOZEAU | DRURY LLP 6 1939 Harrison Street, Suite 150 Oakland CA 94612 …

County

San Mateo County, CA

Filed Date

Nov 16, 2022

Judge Hon. Fineman, Nancy L. Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for Fineman, Nancy L.
preview-icon 13 pages

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Oct-16-2013 02:13 pm Case Number: CPF-05-505509 Filing Date: Oct-16-2013 02:13 pm Filed by: WESLEY G. RAMIREZ Juke Box: 001 Image: 04239482 REPLY COALITION FOR ADEQUATE REVIEW VS. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO et al 001004239482 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.YD WU kW N 10 u 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 © DENNIS J. HERRERA, S…

County

San Francisco County, CA

Filed Date

Oct 16, 2013

Category

WRITS OF MANDATE OR PROH., CERTI., ETC./ADMIN. AGEN

Judge Hon. Rochelle C. East Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for Rochelle C. East
preview-icon 26 pages

1 SANTA BARBARA COUNTY COUNSEL RACHEL VAN MULLEM, County Counsel 2 LINA SOMAIT, Senior Deputy (Bar No. 263876) 105 East Anapamu Street, Suite 201 3 Santa Barbara, California 93101 Telephone (805) 568-2950 / Fax (805) 568-2982 4 E-mail: lsomait@countyofsb.org 5 Attorneys for Respondents and Defendants…

Case Filed

Jul 08, 2021

Case Status

Active

County

Santa Barbara County, CA

Filed Date

Jan 13, 2023

Judge Hon. Anderle, Thomas P Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for Anderle, Thomas P
View More Documents

Please wait a moment while we load this page.

New Envelope