Three Cases Await Decisions
01/31/14 Filed in: High-Speed
Rail
Filings
are now complete in the three currently pending HSR
cases:
The Sacramento Superior Court, Department 31, will hold a hearing on Friday, February 14 on the Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. (See bottom of page for filings.)
The Court of Appeal has a Petition for Extraordinary Writ (initially filed with the Supreme Court) before it. A Preliminary Opposition was filed by the Tos Plaintiffs and Kern County. The Court of Appeal will decide in the near future whether to call for further briefing or dismiss the petition.
And finally, the Court of Appeal is also considering the issue of federal preemption of CEQA raised by the HSR Authority. Oral argument will be held, either prior to or consolidated with its hearing on the appeal of Atherton II.
The Sacramento Superior Court, Department 31, will hold a hearing on Friday, February 14 on the Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. (See bottom of page for filings.)
The Court of Appeal has a Petition for Extraordinary Writ (initially filed with the Supreme Court) before it. A Preliminary Opposition was filed by the Tos Plaintiffs and Kern County. The Court of Appeal will decide in the near future whether to call for further briefing or dismiss the petition.
And finally, the Court of Appeal is also considering the issue of federal preemption of CEQA raised by the HSR Authority. Oral argument will be held, either prior to or consolidated with its hearing on the appeal of Atherton II.
Flash Bulletin
01/29/14 Filed in: High-Speed
Rail
The
California Supreme Court has ordered the transfer of
the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s
Extraordinary Writ
petition to
the Court of Appeal, thereby demonstrating its
independence and commitment to the law, not to
mention its unwillingness to do the bidding of the
Governor.
Dan Walters: the Beginning of the End
01/28/14 Filed in: High-Speed
Rail
In a
column that is amazingly aligned with
plaintiffs’ legal positions posted on this site,
Dan Walters observes the desperation in Governor
Brown’s move to request the California Supreme
Court to give relief to the California High-Speed
Rail Authority. [Please note that Judge Kenny is
erroneously identified as Judge Kelly in this
piece.]
Desperate Governor Petitions Supreme Court
01/24/14 Filed in: High-Speed
Rail
In a rather shocking
act of desperation, Governor Brown has had the
Attorney General file a petition for an extraordinary
writ with the California Supreme Court. The petition
seeks to get around the two rulings of the Sacramento
Superior Court, which have tied up the California
High-Speed Rail Authority in knots.
Interestingly, both the Governor and the Chair of the Authority discounted the significance of the Superior Court ruling when it first came out, and continue to do so. Meanwhile behind the scenes, deputies in the Attorney General’s office were busily working away at a 50+ page brief: “The trial court’s approach to these issues cripples government’s ability to function. The rulings thwart the intent of the voters and the Legislature to finance the construction of high-speed rail...” (p. 2)
The petition is notable for its whining “the world is coming to an end” tone.
See the legal papers here.
Interestingly, both the Governor and the Chair of the Authority discounted the significance of the Superior Court ruling when it first came out, and continue to do so. Meanwhile behind the scenes, deputies in the Attorney General’s office were busily working away at a 50+ page brief: “The trial court’s approach to these issues cripples government’s ability to function. The rulings thwart the intent of the voters and the Legislature to finance the construction of high-speed rail...” (p. 2)
The petition is notable for its whining “the world is coming to an end” tone.
See the legal papers here.
Authority Pleads for End to Beating
01/10/14 Filed in: High-Speed
Rail
The California
High-Speed Rail Authority filed a Motion for Judgment
on the Pleadings, seeking to have the Sacramento
Superior Court put an end to its losses in the
Tos
case. See the papers
filed on this motion at the bottom of
this
page.