Tsiknas

Ramona Unified School District v. Tsiknas

Good Law
135 Cal. App. 4th 510·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 2027·37 Cal. Rptr. 3d 381·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 151
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 9, 2005D044663California4,953 words

Opinion

Opinion

McDONALD, J.

Plaintiff Ramona Unified School District (RUSD) sought to construct a school (the project) and, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), issued a mitigated negative declaration (MND) when it approved the project. However, when RUSD subsequently proposed a potential alteration to the project, defendant Neighborhood Alliance for Safe Ramona Schools (NASRS) filed a writ petition alleging RUSD’s proposal violated CEQA, and sought an order setting aside the proposed change to the MND and requiring RUSD to prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) on numerous issues. The trial court rejected NASRS’s writ petition, rejected NASRS’s request for private attorney general fees, and dismissed the action.

RUSD then filed the present action, pleading causes of action styled as claims for abuse of process and barratry, and named as defendants NASRS, its principals, and its attorney (collectively defendants). Defendants moved to strike the complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, commonly referred to as the anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) statute. (Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc. (2002) 29 Cal.4th 53 ,…

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.