Typical Clients

Hayward Area Planning Association, Citizens for Alternative Transportation Solutions

Issues related to Route 238 improvement project in Hayward and Castro Valley.

Clients since 1994.

Cases:

  • Hayward Area Planning Association v. Van Lobel Sels et al. (1994) [challenge to Caltrans funding for Route 238 Project], Alameda County Superior Court Case No. C-735527.  (Dismissed as unripe for litigation)
  • Hayward Area Planning Association & Citizens for Alternative Transportation Solutions v. Alameda County Transportation Authority et al.(1997) [challenge to local sales tax funding for Caltrans Route 238 Project], Alameda County Superior Court Case No. C-786768; First District Court of Appeal Case No A082685. Published decision (Hayward Area Planning Assn. v. Alameda County Transportation Authority (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 95 [84 Cal.Rptr.2d 744]) reversing trial court decision granting summary judgment to defendants.  On remand, judgment for plaintiffs after five-day court trial. Affirmed on appeal in unpublished decision (First District Court of Appeal Case No. A098051.)

Contact:

HAPA – Sherman Lewis (510) 538-3692; CATS – organization defunct

Sherman Lewis

Litigation related to HAPA challenge to Caltrans Route 238 Project, and representation on other development issues in and around Hayward.

Client since 1992.

Cases:

  • Lewis v. State of California, Department of Transportation (1996)  Alameda County Superior Court Case No. C-777023 [Petition for Writ of Mandate under California Public Records Act.]  Judgment for Plaintiff.  Petition Granted.
  • Mervyn’s v. Reyes, [Lewis] (1997)  [Challenge to City of Hayward open space preservation initiative]  Alameda County Superior Court Case No. H-194536; First District Court of Appeal Cases No. Civ. No. A078208, Civ. No. A079486 (consolidated for hearing and decision). Published decision (Mervyn’s v. Reyes (1998) 69 Cal.App.4th 93) Reversed trial court decision. Found initiative invalid as violative of state election law provisions; also reversed trial court award of attorneys’ fees to Mervyn’s.

Contact:

(510) 538-3692

El Sobrante Valley Legal Defense Fund, Richmond CA

Protection of open space and environmental values in the El Sobrante Valley (City of Richmond & unincorporated Contra Costa County).

Client from 1991 through 2003.

Cases:

  • El Sobrante Valley Legal Defense Fund and Sierra Club v. City of Richmond et al. [“Clark Road”], (1990) Contra Costa County Superior Court Case No. C 90-04032. (Judgment for Plaintiffs)
  • El Sobrante Valley Legal Defense Fund v. City of Richmond et al. [“Mosher Property”], (1990) Contra Costa Superior Court Case No. C 90-05229. (Judgment for Plaintiffs)
  • El Sobrante Valley Legal Defense Fund v. City of Richmond [Richmond General Plan] (1994) Contra Costa Superior Court Case No. C 94-04010, consolidated with East Bay Regional Park District v. City of Richmond, Case No. C 94-03974.  (Settlement through entry of stipulated judgment)
  • El Sobrante Valley Legal Defense Fd. v. City of Richmond et al. [“Castro Ranch”], (1997) Contra Costa Superior Court Case No. . C97-00144, First District Court of Appeal Civil Case No. A090262 [unpublished decision].  (Judgment for Defendants)

Contact:

None – organization defunct

Citizens for Balanced Growth, Livermore, CA

Controlling urban sprawl in the Tri-Valley area of Alameda/Contra Costa County.

Client from 1998 through 2005

Cases:

  • Citizens for Balanced Growth v. Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservation Dist. et al. (1998) [Dougherty Valley], Alameda County Superior Court Case No. V-014957-8; Sacramento County Superior Court Case No. 98 CS02670, consolidated with City of Livermore v. Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservat. Dist., Zone 7 et al., Case No. 98 CS02671.  (Settlement through entry of stipulated judgment)

Contact:

None – organization defunct

Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee, Livermore, CA

Protecting open space in the Tri-Valley area of Alameda/Contra Costa County.

Client from 1992 to 2005.

Cases:

  • Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee and Citizens for Balanced Growth v. Board of Supervisors of Alameda County et al.  (2000) [Alameda County Measure “C”], Alameda County Superior Court Case No. V-019150-6  (Motion for Preliminary Injunction denied);  First District Court of Appeal Case No. A092731 (appeal dismissed as moot); (Case voluntarily dismissed by plaintiffs after Measure C defeated by the voters)
  • Butler et al v. City of Dublin et al (consolidated with City of Pleasanton v. City of Dublin et al.) (1993) [East Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan], Alameda County Superior Court Case No. V-006964-9; San Mateo County Superior Court Case No. 385533.  (Judgment for defendants, but specifying that all mitigation measures adopted by City are mandatory in nature.)
  • Sierra Club, Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee, and James Blickenstaff v. City of San Ramon et al. (1998) [Thomas Ranch Development Project], Contra Costa County Superior Court Case No. C98-01572  (Judgment for Defendants); First District Court of Appeal Cases No. A085620, A086245 (Petition for Writ of Supersedes denied, Appeal voluntarily dismissed by plaintiffs through settlement)

Contact:

none – organization defunct

John Tos, Quentin Kopp, Town of Atherton, Kings County, Patricia Louise Hogan-Giorni, Anthony Wynne, Community Coalition on High-Speed Rail [CC-HSR], Transportation Solutions Defense and Education Fund [TRANSDEF], and California Rail Foundation [CRF]

Challenge to approval of final funding plans by California High Speed Rail Authority and California Director of Finance and facial challenge to the constitutionality of AB 1889 for vilation of Article XVL, Section 1 of California Constitution.

Clients since 2016. For more info, see blog post.

Cases:

  • John Tos et al. v. State of California et al. (2019) [challenge to approvals of final funding plans by California High-Speed Rail Authority and California Director of Finance and facial challenge to constitutionality of AB 1889], Sacramento County Superior Court Case No. 34-2016-00204740.  (Stipulated final judgment entered in favor of respondents – case currently on appeal – case no. C089466)

Contact:

CC-HSR – James Janz – jjanz@janzlaw.com; TRANSDEF – David Schonbrunn – david@schonbrunn.org; co-counsel: Michael Brady – MBrady@rmkb.com