AgdaPkt 2003-04-14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

9". 4z LEGAL ADVOCACY WRAP -UP A number of recent developments in the legal area may interest cities. of Redlands, for writing the friend-of-the court brief on behalf of the League. Briefs Filed The League has recently taken weighed in on several appellate court cases that impact cities. For more information on requesting League amicus assistance, please go to www.cacities.org /legaladvocacy. Liability for 911 Emergency Dispatch Cities recently filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the California Supreme Court urging the court to uphold the dismissal of an action against a public agency for the alleged negligent dispatch of emergency vehicles. The case name is Eastbum v. Regional Fire Protection Authority (No. S107792). The appellate court ruled in favor of the public agency in a published decision. The League thanks Ellen Forman, Deputy City Attorneywith the San Francisco City Attorney's Office and Daniel Barer of Pollak, Vida and Fisher for collaborating on the friend-of- the court brief. Thank you too to the 76 cities that added their name to the brief. The brief is posted under the "recent filings" section of the legal advocacy section of the League's web site. Environmental Analysis The League is filing this week a friend-of-the court brief in a case that has implications for local agencies having the freedom to make decisions regarding the environmental impact analysis. In South County Citizens for Responsible Growth v. City of Elk Grove (No. C042302), the issues on which the League weighed in were (1) whether the court should have deferred to the city's determina- tion that the loss of farmland was significant and unmitigable (the court seemed to rule that the availability of conservation easements to preserve other farmland could mitigate the loss of farm- land), and (2) whether cities can determine that a potential hazard impact is not significant because of low probability. The League thanks Dan McHugh, of the City Time Limits for Suit in Land Use Cases Another friend-of-the-court brief filed within the last few weeks relates to the time within which suits to challenge zoning ordinances must be filed. See Cal. Gov't Code § 65009(c)(1)(13). The issue arose in the context of a county's second - unit ordinance that required that the unit be rented at affordable rates. Among other things, a prop- erty owner objected to the requirement as being contrary to the Costa- Hawkins Act. See Cal. Civ. Code § 1954.52 and following. The case name is Travis v. County of Santa Cruz (No. S109597). The friend-of-the-court brief filed on behalf of the League by Andrew Schwartz in the San Francisco City Attorney's office took issue with the property owner's effort to avoid the time limit statute by claiming the attack on the county s action was "as applied" as opposed to a facial attack. Thank you San Francisco city attorney's office; the is posted under the "recent filings" section of the legal advocacy section of the League's web site. Tort Claims Act The League has filed a request to decertify from publication an opinion that undercuts some of the protection from liability afforded by the Tort Claims Act. In State of California v. Superior Court (Bodde), 105 Cal.AppAth 1008 (5th Dist. Jan. 29, 2003), a former prison inmate sued the State of California and various state employees for poor medical care. The State sought to have certain claims dismissed because the inmate had not filed a tort claim with the state before filing the lawsuit. The court of appeal rejected the state's arguments that these sorts of issues should be resolved at an early stage of the litigation. The League has requested that the California Supreme Court depublish the decision because it will compound the confusion that already exists regarding the tort claim filing requirements and whether these issues can be resolved early on in Continued on Pape 6 PAGE 2 /PRIORITY FOCUS Visit the League's Official Web Site -- www.cacities.org