Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 12 APRIL 2007

"One Bite At The Apple" - CEQA Statute Of Limitations Runs From First Discretionary Approval

Morrison Foerster
Morrison Foerster
Contributor
Morrison Foerster

Morrison Foerster

With approximately 1,000 lawyers in 19 offices, Morrison & Foerster is a preeminent global law firm...

View firm profile
Explore more from Morrison Foerster

Does a second discretionary approval for a project "revive" the project opponents’ ability to sue under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), even after the CEQA statute of limitations has run on the first discretionary approval? This is an issue that has been debated for years. A recent California appellate court decision, Citizens for a Megaplex-Free Alameda v. City of Alameda, is helpful in removing some of this uncertainty.

United StatesEnvironment

Does a second discretionary approval for a project "revive" the project opponents’ ability to sue under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), even after the CEQA statute of limitations has run on the first discretionary approval? This is an issue that has been debated for years. A recent California appellate court decision, Citizens for a Megaplex-Free Alameda v. City of Alameda, is helpful in removing some of this uncertainty.

The court’s decision clarifies when a project is "approved" for purposes of applying the statute of limitations for challenges based on CEQA: it is at the time of "the earliest commitment" by a public agency to issuance of a discretionary approval for the project. The court also held that the filing of a precautionary notice of determination after the approval of subsequent discretionary approvals implementing a project already analyzed under CEQA does not trigger a new statute of limitations period.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from