This case involves a lender who sued a guarantor for the breach of three personal guarantees. George Kaleh signed the guarantee agreements in conjunction with a real-estate-development project, and Western-Southern Life Assurance Company financed the project. After the borrowers defaulted on the underlying loans, Western foreclosed on the property and sued Kaleh.
The district court conducted a

Real parties in interest Halus Power Systems and Louis A. Rigaud individually
and dba Halus Power Systems (collectively, Halus Power), appeal from the trial court’s
post-judgment order granting in part plaintiff Heron Bay Homeowners Association’s
(Heron Bay HOA’s) motion for attorneys’ fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure1
section 1021.5. Defendant City of San Leandro (San Lean

This is an appeal and cross-appeal from an anti-SLAPP ruling which granted the
defense motion to strike in part and denied it in part. (Code Civ. Proc.,1 § 425.16.)
Plaintiff and appellant Golden Eagle Land Investment, L.P. (Golden Eagle) and its
coplaintiff and appellant Mabee Trust (the Trust; sometimes together, Appellants)2 own
real property in the vicinity of Rancho Santa Fe.

This case involves several issues of Texas law relating to an insurer’s duty to defend and the damages that an insured may recover when an insurer breaches that duty. The district court, after disposing of much of the case through a series of partial summary judgment rulings and conducting a bench trial on one remaining claim, issued a final judgment that largely (though not entirely) favored the

Christine May filed this lawsuit against Morgan County, Georgia, seeking relief from a 2010 zoning ordinance that prohibited short term rentals of single family dwellings. The district court dismissed some of May’s claims, concluding that they were barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. It granted summary judgment on her remaining claim, concluding that it was barred by issue preclusion. The distr

This case concerns multiple challenges under the National Environmental Policy Act to Maryland’s proposed “Purple Line” light rail project. Two orders of the district court are principally at issue. In the first order, the district court directed the Federal Transit Administration (“FTA”) to prepare a supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (“SEIS”) to analyze the effects of Metrorail’s rec

Plaintiff and Appellant Creed-21 appeals from the dismissal of its petition for writ
of mandate and complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief under the California
Environmental Quality Act (Petition). The trial court imposed an issue sanction on
standing, which terminated the action, for the misuse of the discovery process in response
to a motion for sanctions pursuant to Cod

Epona, LLC and Michael Fowler (collectively, Appellants) appeal the district court’s order dismissing Appellants’ First Amendment and Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc et seq., claims, and denying as moot Appellants’ motion for a preliminary injunction. Appellants challenge the County of Ventura’s (the County) permitting scheme, which requires
4 EPON

Governments speak. They also petition. And they act in
ways that are neither speaking nor petitioning. It is important to
distinguish between the three, because Code of Civil Procedure
section 425.16 (section 425.16) may apply to the first two, but not
the third.
This case concerns whether the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes properly issued a permit for a fence separating two

This case comes before us after extensive litigation and for the second time
on appeal. The record from the first appeal reveals that the Appellants‟ submitted
their plans to build their carport to the LPOA Architectural Review Committee
(ARC),1 who rejected the plans for failure to comply with the LPOA building
restrictions. Specifically, the Building Restrictions req

Governments speak. They also petition. And they act in
ways that are neither speaking nor petitioning. It is important to
distinguish between the three, because Code of Civil Procedure
section 425.16 (section 425.16) may apply to the first two, but not
the third.
This case concerns whether the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes properly issued a permit for a fence separating two

Pursuant to a plea agreement, Appellant entered a no contest plea to one count of kidnapping.1 He was sentenced to three to six years of imprisonment, but that was suspended in favor of three years of probation. As a condition of his probation, Appellant was required to “submit himself to a full psychiatric evaluation with continued monitoring for an[y] prescribed medications as recommended in t

This appeal concerns a dispute between the West Virginia State Lottery, the
Lottery Commission, the Lottery Director,1 (collectively, the State Lottery) and certain
entities (Permit Holders) who were issued permits to operate limited video lottery game
terminals (LVL terminals). The dispute arose after the State Lottery instructed the Permit
Holders that they would be required to u

This case arises from an amendment to Rockville’s zoning ordinance that prohibited the construction of self-storage facilities within 250 feet of property on which a public school is located. Appellants Siena Corporation and Rockville North Land LLLP (collectively “Siena”) complain that the enactment of this amendment amounted to a denial of their due process and equal protection rights under the

¶1 Appellants Michael E. Baker and Kathleen M. Papi-Baker (collectively, the Bakers) sought review in the district court of a decision, issued by the Park City Council (the Council), denying their application for a plat amendment. The Bakers filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that their proposed amendment complied with municipal zoning regulations and that the Council withheld its permis

The question presented in this appeal is whether the plaintiffs
have plausibly alleged “a domestic injury” to their business or
property within the meaning of Section 1964(c) of the Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), the provision
commonly referred to as civil RICO.1 This question is one of first
impression—in this (or any) Court of Appeals—arising fro

Defendants and appellants the City of Huntington Beach and the City Council of
Huntington Beach (collectively, City) appeal the grant of a petition for writ of mandate
entered by the Superior Court of Los Angeles County in favor of plaintiffs and
respondents The Kennedy Commission, William Adams and Jason Puloe (collectively,
Kennedy) invalidating City’s amendment to the Beach Edin

In 2001, Michael Durkin used two limited liability companies—Dryden Oaks LLC
and Durkin-CAC Lot 24, LLC—to purchase two lots directly adjacent to the McClellan
Palomar Airport (Airport) in the City of Carlsbad, California (City). His development
plans for the two lots were initially successful despite determinations by the San Diego
County Regional Airport Authority (Authority) tha

The City and County of San Francisco (the City) approved construction of a threeunit
condominium project proposed by real parties in interest Jeremy Ricks, Tracy
Kirkham and Joe Cooper on Telegraph Hill at 115 Telegraph Boulevard. Appellant
Protect Telegraph Hill argues that the approval was unlawful because an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) for the project should have been prep

The City of Vallejo (Vallejo or city) appeals from the denial of its request for a
preliminary injunction to enjoin the operation of a medical marijuana dispensary within
the city. The trial court concluded that the city’s ordinance conferring limited immunity
for the operation of such a dispensary conditioned on the prior payment of a business tax
imposes an unconstitutional ex po

Plaintiffs San Bruno Committee for Economic Justice, Unite Here Local 2, Mary
Dowden, Leif Paulsen, Sheral Marshall, Beatriz Johnston, Kathleen Semenza, Lilibeth
Bonifacio, and Molly Gomez appeal from the order and judgment of the trial court
denying their petition for peremptory writ of mandate. Plaintiffs had unsuccessfully
sought to place a referendum on the ballot concerning a

This CEQA1 case arises from the proposal of respondent Omni Resources LLC
(Omni) to build a shopping center on Highway 68 in respondent Monterey County
(County). After preparing an environmental impact report (EIR) concerning the proposed
project and considering public comments, County’s Board of Supervisors approved the
project in 2012.

1 California Environmental Quality

We granted rehearing en banc to review the constitutionality of a municipal
ordinance prohibiting the sale of sexual devices in light of several recent Supreme
Court decisions which, it was argued, call into question the continued vitality of
this Court’s decision in Williams v. Attorney General (Williams IV), 378 F.3d
1232 (11th Cir. 2004). After we agreed to take the case en ba

Here we consider the interplay of two constitutional provisions. First,
sections 8 and 11 of article II of the state Constitution contain the people’s
initiative power, which we have described as “ ‘one of the most precious rights of
our democratic process.’ ” (Associated Home Builders etc., Inc. v. City of
Livermore (1976) 18 Cal.3d 582, 591 (Associated Home Builders); Cal. Const.

The Orange County Water District (District) was created by the California
Legislature to protect and manage groundwater supplies within its territory, which covers
most of Orange County, California. The District and other regulatory agencies have long
been aware of localized groundwater contamination caused by hazardous substance
releases at various sites in the so-called "South Ba