California Court of Appeal

In plaintiffs' challenge to the elements of a county water agency's 2005 Urban Water Management Plan, trial court's grant of plaintiffs' petition for a writ of mandate seeking to enjoin the agency from adopting or implementing the plan is reversed and remanded where: 1) in rejecting the agency's conclusions, the trial court required a level of certainty not factually attainable and not required by the statute, and substituted its own judgment as to the reasonableness of the assumptions relief upon by the agency, which was an error; and 2) the plan at issue here is supported by substantial evidence and is in compliance with the requirements of the Urban Water Management Planning Act as the plan was clear as to its assumptions, which were based on existing conditions and anticipated completion of projects already in progress, which were equally clear as to their limitations, and for which the agency had factual support.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/08/2010
• Published 10/08/2010

Judges

• Bruiniers

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Steven M. Woodside, Stephan C. Volker