Bank of America v. State Water Resources Control Board

Good Law
116 Cal. Rptr. 770·1974 Cal. App. LEXIS 1217·42 Cal. App. 3d 198
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 1, 1974Civ. 14001California5,666 words

Opinion

Opinion

Richardson, J.

Bank of America (hereinafter “Bank”) appeals following judgment dismissing its petition filed under Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5, for writ of mandate against State Water Resources Control Board (hereinafter “Board”). The petition before us initially challenged the validity of two conditions which the Board attached to its decision granting Bank’s application to appropriate water. The parties having resolved their disagreement as to one of the conditions, Bank, accordingly, has abandoned its attack as to it. The remaining condition, focal point of our inquiry, was designated as condition 11, and requires public access to certain reservoirs on the Bank’s property.

Bank’s contentions are: (1) the trial court incorrectly held that substantial evidence exists in the record supporting the imposition of the challenged condition number 11; (2) the Board acted in excess of its jurisdiction in imposing condition 11; and (3) the trial court applied an improper standard of review.

We will conclude that the trial court applied the proper standard of review. We conclude further that the Board has the jurisdiction to condition an appropriation permit on public access to the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.