DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25CV03560·santabarbara·Civil·Civil Law & Motion
Hearing about 2 months agoCONTINUED

Friends of the Carpinteria Salt Marsh vs California Coastal Commission

Hearing re Administrative Record

Hearing date
Jul 8, 2026
Department
Prevailing
N/A
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Causes of action

Parties

PlaintiffFriends of the Carpinteria Salt Marsh
DefendantCalifornia Coastal Commission

Attorneys

Marc Chytilofor Plaintiff
Doug Carstensfor Plaintiff
Andrew Contrerasfor Defendant
Patrick Tuckfor Defendant
Claire Wilkensfor Defendant

Ruling

Case Number

Case Type Civil Law & Motion Hearing Date / Time Wed, 07/08/2026 - 10:00 Nature of Proceedings Hearing re Administrative Record Tentative Ruling Marc Chytilo, Doug Carstens, for Petitioner Andrew Contreras, Patrick Tuck, Claire Wilkens, for Coastal Commission

Beth Collins, Daniel Brunton, Cameron, for Real Party in Interest

This is a petition for writ of mandate involving a coastal development permit approval by the Coastal Commission for a residential development under unusual circumstances. There are both procedural and substantive issues. The approval process was by the Commission alone (not the County of Santa Barbara) through a consolidated process that is itself a subject of this challenge. The Commission's approval was based on the Takings Exception, which involves an overlay of constitutional law, and is also a subject of the challenge. There is a CEQA challenge in addition to claims made under the Coastal Act. There is a 4,300+ page administrative record. The Court needs more time and continues the matter to July 29, 2026, at 10 am in order to give sufficient time to address these numerous and nuanced issues. No appearances required on July 8, 2026.

Tentative Ruling: The Mission LLC vs The City of Santa Barbara Tentative Ruling: The Mission LLC vs The City of Santa Barbara

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