Simonelli

Simonelli v. City of Carmel-By-the-Sea CA6

Good Law
192 Cal. Rptr. 3d 609·2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 807·240 Cal. App. 4th 480
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 24, 2015H040488California2,207 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mihara, J.

Appellant Jacqueline C. Simonelli appeals from a judgment dismissing her petition for a writ of administrative mandamus. Simonelli’s petition challenged the approval by defendant City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (the City) of nonparty Pot D’Oro’s development application. The court sustained without leave to amend the City’s demurrer on the ground that Simonelli had failed to join an indispensable party. On appeal, Simonelli contends that the court erred in finding that Pot D’Oro was an indispensable party and in denying her leave to amend. We conclude that the court did not err in finding Pot D’Oro to be an indispensable party. However, we also find that the court erred in denying Simonelli leave to amend because the court erroneously found that the 90-day limitations period set forth in Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6 applied to her action. We therefore reverse the judgment.

I. Background

Simonelli’s May 6, 2013 administrative mandamus petition challenged the City’s February 5, 2013 approval of an application by Pot D’Oro to develop a vacant lot. Her petition identified Pot D’Oro as the developer who had been granted the approval, but it did not name Pot D’Oro as a…

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.