EXCERPTS FROM THE BRIEF:
…. the “wholesale disqualification” of a party’s experts violates due process as a matter of law, ….
the exclusion of a “credible and substantial” expert report violates due process.
…the Commission violated due process by its wholesale disqualification of Drakes Bay’s expert testimony, which included credible and substantial expert reports. [the commission] never mentions either of the cases, ….
The Commission thereby concedes the issue, and the motion.
This due-process violation, alone, is enough to invalidate the Orders.
the Commission violated due process by not allowing for cross-examination, and that the Commission’s decision was not supported by competent evidence.
The California Coastal Commission responds with a series of small, mostly procedural arguments. All are wrong.
In the quasi-judicial proceeding at issue, the Commission
- did not act as an impartial judge
- was too happy to embrace criticisms of the oyster farm,
- was too hostile to any evidence that favored the farm,
- was too quick to dismiss evidence that rebutted the staff report.
- Its behavior demonstrated a desire to win at any cost, and no respect for the truth.
This Court should issue an order declaring the Orders invalid, and issue a writ of mandate.
For the complete brief, click on or copy and paste the link below into your web browser: