The firm has represented individuals, business, environmental groups and government in suits arising under the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, the California Environmental Quality Act as well as disputes arising under conservation easements.
Notable Cases
California Trout, Inc. v. Bureau of Reclamation and United Conservation Water District
Kerr & Wagstaffe successfully concluded an action under the federal Endangered Species Act to restore steelhead trout to the Santa Clara River system in Southern California. In January 2009, the firm, along with co-counsel, Shute Mihaly & Weinberger, brought an action on behalf of California Trout, Inc. in federal court in order to maintain adequate flows for migrating Southern California steelhead and to mitigate the adverse effects of the Vern Freeman Dam on the steelhead population. Upon reaching agreement on some issues after the motion for preliminary injunction was filed, extensive negotiations resulted in a settlement approved by the court in August 2009. Under the settlement, United will maintain certain flow levels in the Santa Clara River during the steelhead migration season. In addition, a blue ribbon panel was convened to address the adverse effects of the dam on steelhead migration and to recommend remedial measures. The District Court has retained jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement.
Sonoma Land Trust v. BBRRBR LLC
Kerr & Wagstaffe represented the Sonoma Land Trust in an action it brought to enforce a conservation easement that it holds on 528 acres of ranchland near the San Francisco Bay. The Land Trust contended that the owner’s placement of the dredge spoils from a nearby marina on the ranch violated the terms of the agricultural conservation easement.
WaterKeepers Northern California v. Ultramar
The firm represented environmental groups pursuing litigation under the Clean Water Act for illegal discharge of pollutants into the San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento River Delta.
Coffee Lane v. County of Sonoma
The firm represents a coalition of homeowners and citizen groups in an action seeking the enforcement of the California Environmental Quality Act. The case arises from DuMol Winery’s plans to construct a commercial winery and bottling facility in the middle of a residential area. The County has approved various projects for the winery infrastructure, without requiring any form of environmental review. The matter settled while on appeal.
San Francisco BayKeeper v. Tosco Corp., Diablo Services, Inc.
The firm represented environmental groups pursuing litigation under the Clean Water Act for illegal discharge of pollutants into the San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento River Delta.