National Parks & Conservation Ass'n v. County of Riverside

Bad Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 455·71 Cal. App. 4th 1341·84 Cal. Rptr. 2d 563·99 Daily Journal DAR 4309·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3395
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 7, 1999No. D031056California8,994 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Huffman, J.

In September 1994, the superior court issued two related judgments granting petitions for writs of mandate that were brought by certain opponents of a landfill project, including the National Parks and Conservation Association and several other individuals and organizations (collectively the opponents). 1 The landfill project proponents include real parties in interest Kaiser Steel Resources, Inc., Kaiser Eagle Mountain, Inc., and Mine Reclamation Corporation, Inc. (MRC) (collectively appellants). The landfill project will be located within one and one-half miles of the *1348 southeastern boundary of 794,000-acre Joshua Tree National Park (the Park). The petitions challenged the actions of the Board of Supervisors (the Board) of the County of Riverside (the County) in certifying the environmental impact report (EIR) prepared to analyze that project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). (Pub. Resources Code, 2 § 21000 et seq.; Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1085, 1094.5.)

In granting the opponents’ petitions in 1994, the trial court ruled that a number of the opponents’ challenges to the EIR had merit, but two particular challenges (not involved here) were…

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.