Project Set-Aside Determination, Despite Wins And Losses, Showed Conservancy Was Prevailing Party.
In Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach, 2 Cal.5th 918 (2017), the California Supreme Court disagreed with the trial and appellate courts regarding CEQA compliance. The supreme court issued a remittitur, stating: “Costs, if any, must be awarded by the Court of Appeal.” So, the 4/3 DCA in Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach, Case No. G049691 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 21, 2017) (unpublished), decided the Conservancy prevailed for purposes of an appellate costs award after observing “despite the wins and losses scored by each side in this litigation, and the shifting of issues on which each side won or lost, in the end the Conservancy prevailed in its efforts to set aside Project approval.” Justice Ikola authored the opinion.