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

Stop Syar Expansion v. County of Napa

Filing Date: 2016
Case Categories:
  • State Law Claims
    • State Impact Assessment Laws
Principal Laws:
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Description: Challenge to the environmental review for expansion of an aggregate operation.
  • Stop Syar Expansion v. County of Napa
    Docket number(s): A158723
    Court/Admin Entity: Cal. Ct. App.
    Case Documents:
    Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary
    04/23/2021 Opinion and Order Download Amended opinion and order modifying opinion issued; denial of petition affirmed.
    03/25/2021 Opinion Download Denial of petition affirmed. California Appellate Court Rejected CEQA Challenge to Approval of Aggregate Operation Expansion. The California Court of Appeal affirmed the denial of a challenge to the California Environmental Quality Act review for expansion of an aggregate operation in Napa County. The appellate court reviewed five impact areas raised by the petitioner on appeal, including the claim that the environmental impact report (EIR) insufficiently addressed and mitigated greenhouse gas emission impacts caused by loss of oak woodland. The court found that the petitioner had failed to apprise the Napa County Board of Supervisors of the carbon sequestration issue. The court also addressed the merits of the argument, noting that the petitioner did not cite authority requiring “mathematical calculations concerning carbon sequestration mitigation.” The court further concluded that the EIR contained “ample discussion” of greenhouse gas issues actually raised by the petitioner, and that “appropriate mitigation measures” were required.

© 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.