Citizens Task Force on Sohio v. Board of Harbor Commissioners

California Supreme Court

Citizens Task Force on Sohio v. Board of Harbor Commissioners

591 P.2d 1236, 23 Cal. 3d 812, 153 Cal. Rptr. 584, 1979 Cal. LEXIS 229

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 22, 1979

DocketL.A. 30922

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 591 P.2d 1236 (Citizens Task Force on Sohio v. Board of Harbor Commissioners) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Citizens Task Force on Sohio v. Board of Harbor Commissioners, 591 P.2d 1236, 23 Cal. 3d 812, 153 Cal. Rptr. 584, 1979 Cal. LEXIS 229 (Cal. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

*814 Opinion

When two or more public agencies equally qualify as the lead agency for the purpose of preparing an EIR, “the agency which is to act first on the project in question shall be the Lead Agency (following the principle that the environmental impact should be assessed as early as possible in governmental planning).” (Cal. Admin. Code, tit. 14, § 15065, subd. (c).) Because the Port was the first to act on the Sohio project, it became the lead agency and hence was required to defend the adequacy of the entire EIR under Public Resources Code section ,21167; the PUC thereby became a “responsible” agency {id., § 21069), whose actions are governed by section 21167.3. Accordingly, although the PUC could not properly be made a party because its joinder would “deprive the court of jurisdiction over the subject matter” (Code Civ. Proc., § 389, subd. (a)), the court should have permitted the action to proceed against the Port alone.

For the foregoing reasons, it is ordered that the above-entitled cause be transferred to the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.

Bird, C. J., did not participate.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

*814 Opinion

When two or more public agencies equally qualify as the lead agency for the purpose of preparing an EIR, “the agency which is to act first on the project in question shall be the Lead Agency (following the principle that the environmental impact should be assessed as early as possible in governmental planning).” (Cal. Admin. Code, tit. 14, § 15065, subd. (c).) Because the Port was the first to act on the Sohio project, it became the lead agency and hence was required to defend the adequacy of the entire EIR under Public Resources Code section ,21167; the PUC thereby became a “responsible” agency {id., § 21069), whose actions are governed by section 21167.3. Accordingly, although the PUC could not properly be made a party because its joinder would “deprive the court of jurisdiction over the subject matter” (Code Civ. Proc., § 389, subd. (a)), the court should have permitted the action to proceed against the Port alone.

For the foregoing reasons, it is ordered that the above-entitled cause be transferred to the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.

Bird, C. J., did not participate.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

591 P.2d 1236, 23 Cal. 3d 812, 153 Cal. Rptr. 584, 1979 Cal. LEXIS 229, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/citizens-task-force-on-sohio-v-board-of-harbor-commissioners-cal-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack