• Skip to main content
  • Home
  • Contact
  • About
  • Search
    • Search US
    • Search Global
  • Global Litigation
  • U.S. Litigation

Save Berkeley’s Neighborhoods v. Regents of the University of California

Filing Date: 2019
Case Categories:
  • State Law Claims
    • State Impact Assessment Laws
Principal Laws:
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Description: Challenge to environmental review for the Upper Hearst Development Plan for Goldman School of Public Policy and Minor Amendment to the 2020 Long Range Development Plan for Berkeley, including failure to assess or mitigate impacts on climate change.
  • Save Berkeley’s Neighborhoods v. Regents of the University of California
    Docket number(s): S273160
    Court/Admin Entity: Cal.
    Case Documents:
    Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary
    03/03/2022 Order Regents' petition for review and application for stay denied.
  • Save Berkeley’s Neighborhoods v. Regents of the University of California
    Docket number(s): A163810
    Court/Admin Entity: Cal. Ct. App.
    Case Documents:
    Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary
    02/10/2022 Order Regents' request for temporary stay and the petition for writ of supersedeas denied.
  • Save Berkeley’s Neighborhoods v. Regents of the University of California
    Docket number(s): RG19022887
    Court/Admin Entity: Cal. Super. Ct.
    Case Documents:
    Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary
    08/23/2021 Judgment Download Petitions for writ of mandate granted. The court found that the university's environmental review was legally insufficient and that a reduced enrollment alternative should have been considered. Climate change issues were not discussed in the court's decision.
    06/13/2019 Petition for Writ of Mandate Download Petition for writ of mandate filed.

© 2023 · Sabin Center for Climate Change Law · U.S. Litigation Chart made in collaboration with Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP

The materials on this website are intended to provide a general summary of the law and do not constitute legal advice. You should consult with counsel to determine applicable legal requirements in a specific fact situation.