Steinbruner v. Soquel Creek Water District CA6

Filed 2/5/24 Steinbruner v. Soquel Creek Water District CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

REBECCA STEINBRUNER, H050093 (Santa Cruz County Plaintiff and Appellant, Super. Ct. No. 21-CV-02699)

v.

SOQUEL CREEK WATER DISTRICT et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

Representing herself, plaintiff Rebecca Steinbruner petitioned for a writ of mandate under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to challenge an addendum to a previously certified environmental impact report for the “Pure Water Soquel: Groundwater Replenishment and Seawater Intrusion Prevention” project. She filed the mandatory Public Resources Code section 21167.4 request for hearing six days late. Defendants Soquel Creek Water District and its Board of Directors moved to dismiss the action based on that untimely filing. Plaintiff sought relief based on excusable neglect under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b), alleging that multiple hardships caused her to miss the filing deadline. The trial court found that plaintiff had not demonstrated excusable neglect and it granted the motion to dismiss. Applying the deferential abuse of discretion standard of review as we must to this issue, we will affirm the judgment of dismissal.

I. TRIAL COURT PROCEEDINGS

The record on appeal does not include detailed information about the Pure Water Soquel project. It is undisputed that plaintiff unsuccessfully challenged by petition for writ of mandate the certification of the environmental impact report for the project, which was affirmed by a different panel of this court in Steinbruner v. Soquel Creek Water District (July 12, 2021, H047733) [nonpub. opn.]. Plaintiff filed her petition for writ of mandate on November 4, 2021. The petition states defendants approved an addendum to the environmental impact report for the Pure Water Soquel project in October 2021. The petition alleges 12 causes of action, including violations of the Water Code, a State Water Resources Control Board resolution, and Public Resources Code section 21166 (pertaining to subsequent environmental review under CEQA). Plaintiff filed a request for hearing on February 8, 2022, 96 calendar days after the petition was filed. Public Resources Code section 21167.4, subdivision (a) requires a request for hearing to be filed within 90 days of the petition’s filing. Defendants moved to dismiss the petition on February 17, 2022 based on plaintiff’s untimely request for hearing. Plaintiff filed opposition to the motion to dismiss on March 15, 2022, requesting relief under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b) due to excusable neglect. In a supporting declaration, plaintiff described several hardships that caused her to overlook the deadline to file the request for hearing, including: being the primary caregiver for her 89-year-old mother-in-law in Napa County; the suicide of a close friend; responding to Soquel Creek Water District serving plaintiff’s husband with an order of examination relating to a different case; quarantining after exposure to COVID-19; a malfunctioning home computer requiring plaintiff to prepare the request for hearing at the county law library; and technical difficulties that prevented plaintiff from filing the document electronically.