DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CPF26519769·sf·Civil·Administrative/Regulatory
Hearing todayGRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Motion to intervene granted; request to file a cross-complaint in intervention denied.

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC. ET AL VS. DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCES RECYCLING AND RECOVERY ET AL

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO Intervene Pursuant To Code Of Civil Procedure Section 387

Hearing date
Aug 20, 2026
Department
301
Judge
Prevailing
Mixed

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC.
DefendantDEPARTMENT OF RESOURCES RECYCLING AND RECOVERY
OtherALLIANCE OF CALIFORNIA'S FARMERS AND RANCHERS
OtherAMERICAN CHEMISTRY COUNCIL

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Law & Motion / Discovery Dept 301 - CPF26519769 - August 20, 2026 Hearing date: August 20, 2026 Case number: CPF26519769 Case title: NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC. ET AL VS. DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCES RECYCLING AND RECOVERY ET AL Case Number: | | CPF26519769 | Case Title: | | NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC. ET AL VS. DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCES RECYCLING AND RECOVERY ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-08-20 09:00 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION FOR LEAVE TO Intervene Pursuant To Code Of Civil Procedure Section 387; Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Thereof | Rulings: | | On the Law and Motion / Discovery calendar for August 20, 2026, line 1. INTERVENORS ALLIANCE OF CALIFORNIA'S FARMERSAND RANCHERS, AMERICAN CHEMISTRY COUNCIL'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO Intervene.

Intervenors' (Alliance of California's Farmers and Ranchers; American Chemistry Council) motion to intervene is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

Upon timely application, a nonparty who claims an interest in the subject of the action may intervene. (Code of Civil Procedure section 387(d)(1)(B).) "[S]ection 387 should be liberally construed in favor of intervention." (Simpson Redwood Co. v. State of Cal. (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d. 1192, 1200.) Here, the intervenors demonstrate good cause to intervene because they have a direct and immediate interest in the litigation and the intervention will not expand the scope of the suit. Indeed, neither petitioner nor respondent opposes intervention.

Intervenors' request to file a cross-complaint in intervention per Government Code section 11350(a) and Civil Procedure Code section 1060 is DENIED. Under both provisions, the court may decline to hear an action for declaratory relief where the declaration is "not necessary or proper at the time under all the circumstances." (Code of Civil Procedure section 1061.) In this case, intervenors and respondents are aligned in contending that the regulations are enforceable. A judgment in respondents' favor will necessarily uphold the validity of the regulations and the repetitive action for declaratory relief is unnecessary.

Intervenors note that their interests in this case are not in lockstep with respondents. The court is allowing intervention and intervenors will be able to argue their position on the regulations. The court therefore DENIES intervenors' request to file a cross-complaint in intervention. Intervenors may file their answer in intervention per Code of Civil Procedure section 387(e)(1).

For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 301 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 301 Zoom ID 161 502 4290; Passcode 700956.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.

Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept301tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing. Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept301tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.

The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion or Discovery Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(301/VJ) | |

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share