In Durkin v. City & County of San Francisco (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 643, the First District Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred in granting the real party in interest’s special motion to strike under anti-SLAPP (strategic litigation against public participation) law on the grounds that the real party’s actions were not the basis for the petitioner’s complaint. Although the First District reversed the trial court’s decision, the Court found that the real party in interest’s special motion was not frivolous and denied petitioner’s request for sanctions.
More Posts
Privately Owned Public Utility Not Required to Comply With CEQA in Eminent Domain Action
Substantial Changes to Marilyn Monroe Art Installation Extends Statute of Limitations to Challenge Under CEQA
Petitioner Required To Post Bond For Costs Incurred As A Result Of Delay In Carrying Out Affordable Housing Project In Livermore
Design Changes to State Capitol Renovation Revealed in FEIR Did Not Adequately Allow for Public Input or Informed Decision-Making
Construction of 90-Foot-Tall Lights at Athletic Field Not Categorically Exempt as either an Existing Facility or Construction of a Small Structure
Exhausting Administrative Remedies Does Not Toll the Statute of Limitations When the CEQA Determination Is Not at Issue
Court Finds Site Visits and Reports Taken Before and After Issuance of NOP Adequate for Establishing Biological Resources Baseline, EIR’s Emergency Evacuation Analysis Upheld
Attorney General Issues Guidance Outlining Best Practices for Analyzing and Mitigating Wildfire Impacts Under CEQA
