California Legal Brief

The Rule of Hiller v. Marin Municipal Water District is that challenges to water rate ordinances must be brought through validation proceedings within 120 days of adoption, and failure to participate in a water district's validation action bars all subsequent constitutional and substantive challenges to the rates, under Government Code section 53759's mandatory validation statute requirements.

The Rule of People ex rel. Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District v. Spencer Defty is that a cross-complaint challenging the validity of an internal agency policy does not arise from protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute when the regulatory enforcement actions are merely evidence of the policy's application rather than the basis for liability, under circumstances where the cross-complaint seeks declaratory relief that the policy was adopted without proper rulemaking procedures.

The Rule of Bartholomew v. Parking Concepts is that collecting and maintaining individuals' ALPR information without implementing and making public the statutorily required policy harms these individuals by violating their right to know, under the California Automated License Plate Recognition Law (Civil Code sections 1798.90.5-1798.90.551).

The Rule of County of Sacramento v. NKS Real Estate Holdings, Inc. is that a county may pursue a nuisance per se action against property owners who construct and lease accessory dwelling units without required building permits, under circumstances where the county has adopted ordinances expressly declaring permit violations to be public nuisances.

The Rule of Montecito Country Club, LLC v. Kevin C. Root is that an easement holder can acquire prescriptive rights to expand the scope of their recorded easement through open, notorious, continuous, and adverse use for five years, under a preponderance of the evidence standard, when the easement holder has maintained boundary landscaping within the easement area for decades without the landowner's permission or interference.