Land Use Litigation

Land Use Litigation

Overview

Cox, Castle & Nicholson pairs the depth and breadth of our land use practitioners' expertise with our extraordinary trial and appellate experience to deliver unparalleled land use litigation advice and counsel to our clients. We bring a deep understanding of the land use process honed through the successful management of contested matters throughout California. Our attorneys have handled and collectively have analyzed the most effective approaches to achieve success for our clients. Our seamless integration of land use and litigation expertise allows us to offer sophisticated, practical representation that has been tested and refined from the administrative process through trial and the courts of appeal.

Our litigation experience spans a broad spectrum of land use issues, including:

  • California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
  • Clean Water Act
  • Clean Air Act
  • Cortese-Knox (LAFCo)
  • Elections Law
  • Endangered Species Act
  • Migratory Bird Treaty Act
  • National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
  • Planning and Zoning
  • Subdivision Map Act
  • Water issues
  • Williamson Act 

We also have extensive experience with the full panoply of contractual and regulatory issues arising under Development Agreements, Owner Participation Agreements, Reimbursement Agreements, Community Facilities Districts, as well as in due process and takings issues often encountered by project applicants.

Representative
Matters

Represented a public entity client in month-long trial of eminent domain action for the condemnation of substantial acreage that owner was in process of entitling for residential development; successful defense motions in limine at trial court level on issues relating to highest and best use, severance damages, and stigma damages.

Represented amicus curiae in CEQA case involving issue of whether EIR prepared by project applicant's consultant could be adopted by lead agency. Court of Appeal upheld lead agency's decision.

Successfully defended dismissal of a CEQA and Subdivision Map Act petition challenging the approval of final maps.

Successfully defended, at both the trial court and appellate court level, a public agency's programmatic environmental impact report that was challenged on numerous issues, including alternatives, water quality, and EIR recirculation.

Represented 120 landowners in action against various public entities over the flooding of their development by Sespe Creek when it overflowed.

Advised a developer in response to litigation challenging adequacy of water supply assessment.

Represented an engineering firm in multimillion dollar claims arising out of construction of a cap on a former landfill site together with a new municipal golf course. Case involved novel issues of dredge spoils reuse and settled following partial summary judgment victory.

Represented a group of developers with projects in Rancho Cordova against challenge of federal approvals on NEPA, Endangered Species Act, and Clean Water Act grounds.

Represented a residential developer client in litigation against municipality for breach of development agreement, Section 1983, and inverse condemnation, arising out of municipality's refusal to approve sewer plans on what were alleged to be trumped up grounds; marshaled evidence of government corruption to achieve substantial settlement largely in the form of reduced permit fees and beneficial entitlement arrangements.

Successfully challenged DIR determination regarding the status of a project as a public work subject to prevailing wage law.

More »

Successfully settled a case for co-owners of ranch lands in Sonoma and Marin Counties in a quiet title and partition action filed in the Sonoma County Superior Court, involving novel issues of how to value temporal interests in land and joint business enterprises.

Represented a commercial property owner with respect to impacts on its office building property of proposed adjacent high-rise condo development, and ongoing representation for entitlement of the condo project redesigned per litigation settlement.

Obtained a $2 million judgment following a two-week jury trial against a city that had obtained an extraction for traffic mitigation fees from the property owners.

Attorneys &
Paralegals

Name Title City Phone  
Birkey, Scott B. Partner San Francisco 415.262.5162
  • email
  • vcard
  • LinkedIn
Bley, Kenneth B. Partner Los Angeles 310.284.2231
  • email
  • vcard
  • LinkedIn
Briseño, Monica R. Associate Los Angeles 310.284.2242
  • email
  • vcard
  • LinkedIn
Cebrian, Christian H. Partner San Francisco 415.262.5123
  • email
  • vcard
  • LinkedIn
Klein, Linda C. Associate San Francisco 415.262.5130
  • email
  • vcard
  • LinkedIn
Lamport, Stanley W. Partner Los Angeles 310.284.2275
  • email
  • vcard
Morrison, Clark Partner San Francisco 415.262.5113
  • email
  • vcard
  • LinkedIn
Mudge, Anne E. Partner San Francisco 415.262.5107
  • email
  • vcard
  • LinkedIn
Paone, Tim Partner Orange County 949.260.4655
  • email
  • vcard
  • LinkedIn
Potter, Trevor B. Associate Orange County 949.260.4624
  • email
  • vcard
Sabey, Andrew B. Partner San Francisco 415.262.5103
  • email
  • vcard
  • LinkedIn
Stein, Tamar C. Partner Los Angeles 310.284.2248
  • email
  • vcard
  • LinkedIn
Waite, David P. Partner Los Angeles 310.284.2218
  • email
  • vcard
  • LinkedIn
Zischke, Michael H. Partner San Francisco 415.262.5109
  • email
  • vcard
  • LinkedIn

Spotlight

Environmental And Land Use Practices Ranked Top In Northern California By The Recorder

One of California’s leading legal industry newspapers named Cox Castle & Nicholson's Northern California Environmental... More»