In Jenkins et al. v. Brandt-Hawley et al. (2022) 86 Cal.App.5th 1357, the First District Court of Appeal found that CEQA suits can be subject to malicious prosecution actions. The Court of Appeal upheld an order denying an anti-SLAPP motion, allowing a malicious prosecution action to proceed against an attorney who litigated an unsuccessful CEQA challenge to the reconstruction of a single-family residence in San Anselmo.
BackgroundAfter purchasing a property in San Anselmo in 2017, Charles and Ellen Jenkins, learned that the home would have to be rebuilt to conform to present day building code requirements. The Jenkins filed an application with the Town to authorize demolition of the home and development of a new home and detached studio on the property (the “Project”). Neighbors objected to the design of the Project based on aesthetic and privacy concerns and the Jenkins worked with the neighbors to redesign the Project.
The redesigned Project was approved by the Planning Commission on March 12, 2018. The Planning Commission found that the Project was categorically exempt from CEQA for new construction of a single-family residence; that the residence was not historically significant and no historical resource exception to the exemption applied; and that the design was compatible with the character of the neighborhood. But the neighbors remained unsatisfied and appealed the approval to the Town Council. Prior to the Town Council hearing, neighbors urged the Jenkins to prepare a historic-resource evaluation, and the Jenkins obliged. The report found that the property was not an eligible historic resource. The Town Council affirmed the Planning Commission’s approval of the Project and its CEQA categorical exemption determination.
An association and an individual, represented by Susan Brandt-Hawley, filed a petition for writ of...
