Photo of Andrew M. Skanchy

Andrew M. Skanchy

Subscribe to Andrew M. Skanchy's Posts

Andrew Skanchy helps clients get projects done. Although the permitting process can be confusing and daunting, Andrew has extensive experience navigating clients through the morass and helping them achieve their objectives.

He provides strategic guidance on entitlement considerations and getting a project through the CEQA and NEPA processes, with a primary goal of avoiding litigation. But, should litigation ensue, Andrew is adept at defending project approvals in both federal and state court, having successfully defended public agencies and private developers when their projects are challenged. (Read more...)

Follow: Read more about Andrew M. SkanchyAndrew M.'s Linkedin Profile

In Robinson v. Superior Court (2023) 88 Cal.App.5th 1144, the Fifth District Court of Appeal held that Southern California Edison (SCE), as an investor-owned public utility, was not required to comply with CEQA in an eminent domain action because SCE was neither a “public agency” under CEQA nor did SCE need approval from a public…

In Committee to Relocate Marilyn v. City of Palm Springs (Feb. 23, 2023, D080907) __Cal.App.5th__ [2023 Cal. App. LEXIS 120], the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that the petition filed by the Committee to Relocate Marilyn (Committee), challenging the determination by the City of Palm Springs (City) to issue a Notice of Exemption (NOE)…

In Save Our Capitol! v. Department of General Services (Jan. 18, 2023, C096617, C096637) __Cal.App.5th__, the Third District Court of Appeal held that the Department of General Services violated CEQA when certain design changes to the State Capitol renovation (Project) were not revealed until the final EIR (FEIR), preventing the public from commenting on the…