T 415.392.7900
F 415.398.4321
505 Sansome Street
Suite 900
San Francisco, CA 94111
15. Napa Valley Wine Train,
50 Cal. 3d 370 (1990), 787 P.2d 976.
The Court concluded that because the Wine Train’s passenger service would be operated on “rights-of-way” already in existence, the new service qualified for an exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”.) The Commission decision to the contrary was annulled. Fourteen years later, the Wine Train litigation was still pending before the Commission and the Courts (See City of St. Helena, Para. 9, supra.) Whether the discourse, like wine, improved with age or simply oxidized is a question left to the individual reader. Note that under Section 21168.6 of the Public Resources Code, review of Commission decisions related to CEQA is reserved to the Supreme Court, a factor leading to delay in the review resulting in UCAN (para. 1). A conflict between that statute and Section 1756 (as amended in 1998) was recently resolved in an unpublished opinion in favor of the former.
Abridged Summary
Links Re: Selected Cases:
- Util. Consumers’ Action Net.
- The Util. Reform Net.
- S. California Edison
- Pacific Bell Wireless
- S. California Edison
- Santa Clara v.. Trans. Au.
- S. California Edison (CEERT)
- Util. Consumers’ Action Net.
- City of St. Helena
- PG&E Corp.
- S. California Edison
- North Shuttle
- Assembly of CA
- Camp Meeker Water Syst.
- Napa Valley Wine Train
- S. California Gas Company
- Toward Utili. Rate Norm.
- City & County of SF
- S. California Gas Co.,Pac. Tel. & Tele. Co. & PG&E
- Gen. Tel. Co. of CA
- K. Cory, State Controller
- U.S. Steel Corporation
- County of Inyo
- “CLAM,” Towards Util.Rate Normalization

