Eder v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. CA2/8

Filed 4/1/15 Eder v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

HARVEY MARK EDER, B251627

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. SC119641) v.

SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

APPEAL from the judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Luis A. Lavin, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions.

Harvey Mark Eder, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Kurt R. Wiese, Barbara Baird and William B. Wong for Defendants and Appellants.

**********

Plaintiff and appellant Harvey Mark Eder filed this action for a writ of mandate, seeking to compel defendants and appellants South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and Barry Wallerstein, SCAQMD’s executive officer, to convert the entire south coast air basin to solar energy within five years. Defendants filed a demurrer which was sustained with 30 days leave to amend. Plaintiff did not file an amended pleading and defendants therefore sought an ex parte dismissal pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 581, subdivision (f)(2) (hereafter section 581(f)(2)). The trial court granted defendants’ ex parte application and ordered a dismissal without prejudice, denying defendants’ request for a dismissal with prejudice. Defendants appeal from that order and request entry of a judgment of dismissal with prejudice. Plaintiff filed a notice of cross-appeal from the order of dismissal but did not present any additional contentions for consideration. We reverse the order of dismissal without prejudice and direct the trial court to enter a judgment of dismissal with prejudice in favor of defendants. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiff filed his complaint in propria persona for a “writ of mandate” requiring defendant SCAQMD to complete a solar conversion of the entire south coast air basin within five years. Defendants filed a demurrer to the complaint, and also moved to have the action deemed related to two other nearly identical complaints filed by plaintiff, and transferred to the central district in accordance with Los Angeles Superior Court Local Rule 2.3 which requires writs of mandate to be filed in that district. The actions were deemed related and were transferred to the writs and receivers department in the central district. On May 28, 2013, the court sustained defendants’ demurrer on multiple grounds, including that the complaint failed to state sufficient facts showing a mandatory duty