Agreement To Extend Statute Of Limitations For CEQA Claim Was Ineffective Because It Did Not Include An Indispensable Party

• Published date: 16 November 2021
• Law Firm: Perkins Coie LLP
• Author: Ms Lucille Finchbaugh

The Court of Appeal held that a CEQA challenge to a decision approving removal of trees adjacent to PG&E gas pipelines was time-barred because an agreement to toll the statute of limitations did not include PG&E, which was an indispensable party in the proceedings, and the suit was filed after the applicable 180-day limitations period had expired. Save Lafayette Trees v. East Bay Regional Park District (Pacific Gas and Electric Company), 66 Cal.App.5th 21 (2021).

As part of PG&E's Community Pipeline Safety Initiative, PG&E conducted an in-depth review of trees located near its gas transmission pipelines and...