Fifth District Court of Appeal Finds Res Judicata Does Not Apply to Case Challenging DOGGR’s Issuance of Oil and Gas Well Permits
The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed a lower court judgment dismissing a CEQA challenge filed by environmental groups against the California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR), in Association for Irritated Residents v. Dept. of Conservation (2017) 11 Cal.App.5th 1202.
The environmental groups challenged DOGGR’s issuance of 214 permits for new oil and gas wells. The permit recipient successfully demurred on res judicata grounds in Kern County Superior Court, citing a prior judgment in the Alameda County Superior Court. However, the Fifth District Court of Appeal held that the Alameda judgment was based on mootness and ripeness grounds, so res judicata did not apply to bar the Kern County action.
The Fifth District Court explained that a judgment based on mootness does not address the substance of the claim. Thus, a judgment based on mootness is not a judgment on the merits, one of the required elements for res judicata. The court also found a lack of privity between the parties in the different proceedings. As a result, the matter was remanded back to the trial court.