Dunn-Edwards Corp. v. South Coast Air Quality Management District

Good Law
19 Cal. App. 4th 536·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 1039·24 Cal. Rptr. 2d 99·93 Daily Journal DAR 13257·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7782
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 16, 1993B057868California3,429 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kitching, J.

A group of 21 California paint manufacturers, contractors, and dealers (the Paint Companies) sued several air pollution control districts (the Districts), the Air Resources Board (ARB), the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, Inc. (CAPCOA), and Technical Review Group (TRG), challenging certain amendments to environmental regulations (Rule Amendments) limiting the amount of solvent contained in enamels, lacquers, and paints (architectural coatings). The Paint Companies appeal the order dismissing the action as to TRG after the trial court sustained without leave to amend TRG’s demurrers to the 10th, 11th, and 12th causes of action set forth in the petition and complaint (the complaint).

The complaint alleged, in essence, that TRG engaged in rulemaking, which is the exclusive province of the Districts, because the Districts’ personnel participated in the work of TRG in developing a suggested control measure (SCM) which, with some modifications, was ultimately adopted by the Districts.

The facts alleged in the complaint establish as a matter of law that TRG did not usurp the rulemaking authority of the Districts, and therefore, did not unlawfully…

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.