East Bay Municipal Utility District v. Department of Forestry & Fire Protection

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 257·43 Cal. App. 4th 1113·51 Cal. Rptr. 2d 299·96 Daily Journal DAR 3328·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1979
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 1996A064890California6,951 words

Opinion

Opinion

Anderson, J.

In this case we examine what evidence may be considered in a declaratory relief action which seeks to challenge the legality under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of a policy or practice employed by an administrative agency. The case, which arises from timber harvest plans approved under the Z’berg-Negedly Forest Practice Act of 1973 (Pub. Resources Code, § 4511 et seq.), is an appeal by plaintiff, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), from a judgment entered in a coordinated proceeding joining the utility’s petition for a writ of mandamus with this action for declaratory relief both brought against defendant, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF). Plaintiff sought by its mandamus action to challenge CDF’s approval of a particular timber harvest plan and by its declaratory relief action to establish that CDF was following a pattern and practice of improperly approving other timber harvest plans (THP’s), all of which had been submitted to CDF by intervener, Georgia Pacific Corporation (Georgia Pacific).

In Californians for Native Salmon etc. Assn. v. Department of Forestry (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 1419 [ 271 Cal.Rptr. 270 ]…

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.