Your case is unique, but you are not alone.

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know your judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know your attorney

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know your court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes and we don’t recommend changing your attorney — that’s a conversation for you and them. We just show you what the record already says.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase

Case Information

Filed 2025-03-20
Status Appealed
Type (02) Unlimited Writ Of Mandate
Docket 29 entries

Parties

Plaintiff Believe In Chico, Llc|View Document 's Opposition To Respondent's Demurrer To Verified Petition|View Document 's Request For Judicial Notice In Support Of Petitioner's Opposition
Defendant City Of Chico|View Document Notice Of Hearing On Demurrer Of To Verified Petition For Writ Of Mandate And Complaint|View Document Request For Judicial Notice In Support Of 's Demurrer To Verified Petition For Writ Of|View Document Declaration Of G Giovinco In Support Of 's Demurrer To Verified Petition For Writ Of|View Document Petitioner's Opposition To 's Demurrer To Verified Petition|View Document 's Reply Brief In Support Of Demurrer To Verified Petition
Photo of Hon. Benson, Stephen E

Judge

Hon. Benson, Stephen E

Butte County (CA)

California

View Judge Profile

Lawyers

Docket Entries

  1. Proof of Mailing View Document Proof of Mailing
  2. Civil Case Cover Sheet View Document Civil Case Cover Sheet
  3. Summons Issued and Filed View Document Summons
  4. Notice of Assignment and Case Management Conference View Document Notice of Assignment and Case Management Conference Judicial Officer Benson, Stephen E
  5. Proof of Service of Summons Filed View Document Proof of Service of Summons/Petition
  6. Answer - Response - Denial - Unlimited View Document Notice of Hearing on Demurrer of Respondent to Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint Comment Notice of Hearing on Demurrer of Respondent City of Chico to Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory Relief; Demurrer; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof
  7. Request for Judicial Notice View Document Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Respondent's Demurrer to Verified Petition for Writ of Comment Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Respondent City of Chico's Demurrer to Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory Relief
  8. Declaration View Document Declaration of G Giovinco in Support of Respondent's Demurrer to Verified Petition for Writ of Comment Declaration of G Giovinco in Support of Respondent City of Chico's Demurrer to Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory Relief
  9. Proof of Service View Document Proof of Service
  10. Opposition - No Fee View Document Petitioner's Opposition to Respondent's Demurrer to Verified Petition Comment Opposition to Respondent's Demurrer to Verified Petition
  11. Request for Judicial Notice View Document Petitioner's Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Petitioner's Opposition Comment Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Petitioner's Opposition to Respondent's Demurrer to Verified Petition
  12. Reply View Document Respondent's Reply Brief in Support of Demurrer to Verified Petition Comment Reply Brief in Support of Demurrer to Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory Relief
  13. Demurrer Original Type Demurrer View Document Notice of Hearing on Demurrer of Respondent to Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint View Document Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Respondent's Demurrer to Verified Petition for Writ of View Document Declaration of G Giovinco in Support of Respondent's Demurrer to Verified Petition for Writ of View Document Proof of Service View Document Petitioner's Opposition to Respondent's Demurrer to Verified Petition View Document Petitioner's Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Petitioner's Opposition View Document Civil Minutes Judicial Officer Benson, Stephen E Hearing Time 9:00 AM Result Held Comment Respondent's Demurrer to Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory Relief Parties Present Petitioner Retained Counsel: McNeill, Jackson D Retained Counsel: McNeill, Jackson D Retained Counsel: Bowman, John Michael
  14. Tentative Ruling Comment The demurrer is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. Both parties' requests for judicial notice are granted. The salient issue presented is whether the circumstances surrounding Petitioner's proposed Valley Edge development project resulted in a "decision" to "adopt ... a ... plan". The Petition alleges that in January 2023, the Chico City Council voted to approve the project. Then the City of Chico voters rejected the project via referendum on March 5, 2024. (Note: the Petition states the voters disapproved of the project on March 5, 2025. The only reasonable interpretation is that 2025 is a clerical error.) Following the results of the referendum the Chico City Council voted to adopt the results on May 7, 2024. The Court takes Judicial Notice of these facts; the Chico City Council's approval of the project in January 2023, the results of the city wide referendum on the project on March 5, 2024, and the action of the Chico City Council adopting the referendum results on May 7, 2024. The net effect of the Chico City Council's adoption of the referendum resulted in Petitioner's Valley Edge development plan being denied. Although the facts are not identical to the facts in General Development Co., L.P. v. City of Santa Maria (2012) 202 Cal.App.4th 1391, the reasoning of that case applies here. General Development held that denial of rezoning is a "decision" for purposes of Gov't Code 65009(c)(1)(A). The 90-day Requirement of Gov. Code 65009(c)(1)(A) Applies to this Action Gov't Code 65009(c)(1)(A) Except as provided in subdivision (d), no action or proceeding shall be maintained in any of the following cases by any person unless the action or proceeding is commenced and service is made on the legislative body within 90 days after the legislative body's decision: (A) To attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of a legislative body to adopt or amend a general or specific plan. This paragraph does not apply where an action is brought based upon the complete absence of a general plan or a mandatory element thereof but does apply to an action attacking a general plan or mandatory element thereof on the basis that it is inadequate. [Emphasis Added] Consistent with the General Development case, the Chico City Council's actions in adopting the results of the referendum constitute a decision for purposes of the statute. Thus, the 90-day rule applies here. Petitioner's argument that CCP 338(a) supersedes Gov. Code 65009(c)(1)(A) is not persuasive. As discussed, Gov. Code 65009(c)(1)(A) applies to this action and prevails as the more specific statute. Consequently, the action is time barred. The facts surrounding the timing of the Chico City Council's denial of the plan appear to be undisputed. Thus, despite the liberal policy favoring amendment, the Court fails to see how the Petition can be successfully amended to overcome Gov. Code 65009(c)(1)(A). The demurrer is sustained without leave to amend. Respondent shall prepare and submit a form of order consistent with this ruling within 2 weeks.
  15. Case Under Submission for Decision Judicial Officer Benson, Stephen E
  16. Order View Document Order After Hearing Judicial Officer Benson, Stephen E Comment Order After Hearing
  17. Minute Order View Document Civil Minutes
  18. Proof of Mailing View Document Proof of Mailing
  19. Proof of Service View Document Proof of Service
  20. Judgment View Document Judgment of Dismissal Judicial Officer Benson, Stephen E Comment Judgment of Dismissal
  21. Proof of Mailing View Document Proof of Mailing
  22. Notice of Appeal - Appellate Court Comment Notice of Appeal Unlimited Civil
  23. Appeal - Default Notice Issued View Document Notice of Default
  24. Clerk's Notice re Notice of Appeal with Proof of Mailing View Document Clerk's Notice Re Notice of Appeal
  25. Appeal - Deposit for Clerk's Transcript
  26. Case Management Conference View Document Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory Relief View Document Proof of Service of Summons/Petition Judicial Officer Benson, Stephen E Hearing Time 10:30 AM Cancel Reason Vacated
  27. Appellant's Notice Designating Record on Appeal View Document Appellant s Notice Designating Record on Appeal
  28. Notice View Document Clerk's Notice Re. Appellant's Notice Designating Record on Appeal Comment Clerk's Notice Re. Appellant's Notice Designating Record on Appeal
  29. Order from the Third District Court of Appeal View Document Order from the Third District Court of Appeal

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.