Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Impact Fees As CEQA Mitigation
Properly administered impact fee programs can operate to streamline California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review of later development projects. At the same time, impact fee programs that are not implemented in accordance with the original expectations, or that are founded upon unrealistic assumptions, may offer the lead agency and affected applicant little or no real legal relief, and may be a trap for the unwary.
Impact fees are controlled by Government Code section 66000-66022. Fees may be imposed based upon a comprehensive impact fee program (Blue Jeans Equities West v. City and County of San Francisco (1992) 3 Cal. App. 4th 164) or as calculated on an ad hoc basis (Erlich v. City of Culver City (1996) 12 Cal.4th 854). The methodology ' broad-based vs. ad hoc ' determines which findings must be adopted by the imposing agency. Loyola Marymount University v. Los Angeles Unified School District (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 1256. Generally, impact fees of broad application receive less judicial scrutiny (Erlich v. City of Culver City, supra at p. 875).
Mitigation Considerations
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?