Figueroa

Figueroa v. California Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission

Good Law
110 Cal. App. 4th 1115·2 Cal. Rptr. 3d 376
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 25, 2003E030510California1,574 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ward, J.

Plaintiffs and appellants Alfredo A. Figueroa, and Carmela F. Gamica (plaintiffs), appeal after the trial court dismissed their action against defendant and respondent California Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (the Energy Commission), and defendant and real party in interest Blythe Energy, LLC (Blythe Energy). The trial court had sustained the defendants’ demurrers to plaintiffs’ complaint, without leave to amend, on the ground that the action was barred by a special statute of limitations. We shall reverse.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The Energy Commission approved Blythe Energy’s application to develop a new power plant on a site located near the City of Blythe. Plaintiffs filed an action challenging the approval, focusing largely on alleged noncompliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.

Defendants demurred on the ground, among others, that the complaint was untimely under a special statute of limitations provided in the Warren-Alquist State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act, contained in Public Resources Code section 25000 et seq. Public Resources Code section 25901 provides, in pertinent part: “Within 30 days…

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.