exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine in California

2025(Abelleira v. District Court of Appeal, Third Dist. (1941) 17 Cal.2d 280, 291 (Abelleira) [discussing doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies].) It is undisputed the Board continues to process CEMEX’s permit application No. A029967.

2024Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies Finally, we agree with the Center and the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band, and with amicus curiae, that to rule that the writ petitions were untimely filed because the 30-day limitations period provided by section 21167, subdivision (c) commenced when the Planning Commission filed an NOD after its nonfinal decision, despite the appeals of that decision to the Board of Supervisors, would violate the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies. “[T]he rule is that where an administrative remedy is provided by statute, relief must be sought from the

2017Code, § 65009, subd. (b)(1).) "Under the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies, 'where an administrative remedy is provided by statute, relief must be sought from *441 the administrative body and this remedy exhausted before the courts will act. [Citation.] This rule 'is not a matter of judicial discretion, but is a fundamental rule of procedure laid down by courts of last resort, followed under the doctrine of stare decisis and binding upon all courts.' [Citation.] Exhaustion of administrative remedies is, in short, 'a jurisdictional prerequisite to resort to the courts.' [Citatio

2017Code, § 65009, subd. (b)(1).) "Under the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies, 'where an administrative remedy is provided by statute, relief must be sought from *441 the administrative body and this remedy exhausted before the courts will act. [Citation.] This rule 'is not a matter of judicial discretion, but is a fundamental rule of procedure laid down by courts of last resort, followed under the doctrine of stare decisis and binding upon all courts.' [Citation.] Exhaustion of administrative remedies is, in short, 'a jurisdictional prerequisite to resort to the courts.' [Citatio

2026Co. (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 452, 462 [explaining that the doctrine of implied findings “(1) directs the appellate court to presume that the trial court made all factual findings necessary to support the judgment so long as substantial evidence supports those findings and (2) applies unless the omissions and 5 A. Standard of Review “We apply a de novo standard of review to the legal question of whether the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies in a given case.” (Citizens for Open Government v. City of Lodi (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 865, 873 .) B.

2023(Citizens for Open Government v. City of Lodi (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 865, 876 .) We review de novo whether plaintiff complied with the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies.

1992(Sea & Sage Audubon Society, Inc. v. Planning Com. (1983) 34 Cal.3d 412, 417 [ 194 Cal.Rptr. 357 , 668 P.2d 664 ].) One of the exceptions to the doctrine of the exhaustion of administrative remedies is “ ‘when the subject matter of the controversy lies outside the administrative agency’s jurisdiction.’” (County of Contra Costa v. State of California (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 62, 73 [ 222 Cal.Rptr. 750 ].) “It is elementary that the construction of a statute (or ordinance) and its applicability is *1464 solely a question of law.” (Killian v. City and County of San Francisco (1978) 77 Cal.App.3d 1,

1992(Sea & Sage Audubon Society, Inc. v. Planning Com. (1983) 34 Cal.3d 412, 417 [ 194 Cal.Rptr. 357 , 668 P.2d 664 ].) One of the exceptions to the doctrine of the exhaustion of administrative remedies is “ ‘when the subject matter of the controversy lies outside the administrative agency’s jurisdiction.’” (County of Contra Costa v. State of California (1986) 177 Cal.App.3d 62, 73 [ 222 Cal.Rptr. 750 ].) “It is elementary that the construction of a statute (or ordinance) and its applicability is *1464 solely a question of law.” (Killian v. City and County of San Francisco (1978) 77 Cal.App.3d 1,

2022(See Castaic Lake, supra, 180 Cal.App.4th at p. 251 ; Save Our Residential Environment v. City of West Hollywood (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1745, 1750 [“SORE’s objections to the Project, while not identifying the precise legal inadequacy upon which the trial court’s ruling ultimately rested, fairly apprised [the agency] that SORE believed the environmental impacts of developing the Project . . . would be deleterious to the surrounding community”].) Moreover, “the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies has not hardened into inflexible dogma. [Citation.] It contains its own exceptions, as w

2016While acknowledging that inmates must exhaust available administrative remedies before filing a petition in the superior court, the court noted that “ ‘the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies has not hardened into inflexible dogma. [Citation.] It contains its own exceptions, as when the subject matter of the controversy lies outside the administrative agency’s jurisdiction [citation], when pursuit of an administrative remedy would result in irreparable harm [citations], when the administrative agency cannot grant an adequate remedy [citations], and when the aggrieved party can po

1964The court, after noting the policy considerations that support the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies, upheld the contention and stated the principles which guide us in the instant case: “As was said in United States v. Superior Court, 19 Cal.2d 189, 194 [ 120 P.2d 26 ], “ ‘It is now firmly established in this state that a litigant must invoke and exhaust an administrative remedy provided by statute before he may resort to the courts.

1964The court, after noting the policy considerations that support the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies, upheld the contention and stated the principles which guide us in the instant case: “As was said in United States v. Superior Court, 19 Cal.2d 189, 194 [ 120 P.2d 26 ], “ ‘It is now firmly established in this state that a litigant must invoke and exhaust an administrative remedy provided by statute before he may resort to the courts.

2015(Porterville Citizens for Responsible Hillside Development v. City of Porterville (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 885, 909 [].) Inasmuch as the issue of exhaustion is a question of law, ‘[a]n appellate court employs a de novo standard of review when determining whether the exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine applies.’ (Sierra Club, supra, 163 Cal.App.4th at p. 536 .)” (North Coast Rivers Alliance v. Marin Municipal Water Dist.

2015(Porterville Citizens for Responsible Hillside Development v. City of Porterville (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 885, 909 [].) Inasmuch as the issue of exhaustion is a question of law, ‘[a]n appellate court employs a de novo standard of review when determining whether the exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine applies.’ (Sierra Club, supra, 163 Cal.App.4th at p. 536 .)” (North Coast Rivers Alliance v. Marin Municipal Water Dist.

2018The same is true for ' "[g]eneral objections to project approval. ..." [Citations.]' [Citation.] ' "[T]he objections must be sufficiently specific so that the agency has the opportunity to evaluate and respond to them." ' '' ( Sierra Club v. City of Orange (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 523 , 535-536, 78 Cal.Rptr.3d 1 .) "An appellate court employs a de novo standard of review when determining whether the exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine applies." ( Id . at p. 536, 78 Cal.Rptr.3d 1 .) Appellants contend the court lacked jurisdiction to consider certain objections to the sufficiency of th

2018The same is true for ' "[g]eneral objections to project approval. ..." [Citations.]' [Citation.] ' "[T]he objections must be sufficiently specific so that the agency has the opportunity to evaluate and respond to them." ' '' ( Sierra Club v. City of Orange (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 523 , 535-536, 78 Cal.Rptr.3d 1 .) "An appellate court employs a de novo standard of review when determining whether the exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine applies." ( Id . at p. 536, 78 Cal.Rptr.3d 1 .) Appellants contend the court lacked jurisdiction to consider certain objections to the sufficiency of th

2021Bd. of Directors (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 614, 623 (North Coast Rivers).) Thus, “the requirement of exhaustion is a jurisdictional prerequisite, and not a matter of judicial discretion.” (Tahoe Vista, supra, 81 Cal.App.4th at p. 589 ; accord, Clews Land & Livestock, LLC v. City of San Diego (2017) 19 Cal.App.5th 161, 184 (Clews Land); North Coast Rivers, supra, 216 Cal.App.4th at p. 624 .) “Inasmuch as the issue of exhaustion is a question of law, ‘[a]n appellate court employs a de novo standard of review when determining whether the exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine applies.’ ” (No

2021Bd. of Directors (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 614, 623 (North Coast Rivers).) Thus, “the requirement of exhaustion is a jurisdictional prerequisite, and not a matter of judicial discretion.” (Tahoe Vista, supra, 81 Cal.App.4th at p. 589 ; accord, Clews Land & Livestock, LLC v. City of San Diego (2017) 19 Cal.App.5th 161, 184 (Clews Land); North Coast Rivers, supra, 216 Cal.App.4th at p. 624 .) “Inasmuch as the issue of exhaustion is a question of law, ‘[a]n appellate court employs a de novo standard of review when determining whether the exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine applies.’ ” (No

2017Code, § 65009, subd. (b)(1).) "Under the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies, 'where an administrative remedy is provided by statute, relief must be sought from *441 the administrative body and this remedy exhausted before the courts will act. [Citation.] This rule 'is not a matter of judicial discretion, but is a fundamental rule of procedure laid down by courts of last resort, followed under the doctrine of stare decisis and binding upon all courts.' [Citation.] Exhaustion of administrative remedies is, in short, 'a jurisdictional prerequisite to resort to the courts.' [Citatio

2017Code, § 65009, subd. (b)(1).) "Under the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies, 'where an administrative remedy is provided by statute, relief must be sought from *441 the administrative body and this remedy exhausted before the courts will act. [Citation.] This rule 'is not a matter of judicial discretion, but is a fundamental rule of procedure laid down by courts of last resort, followed under the doctrine of stare decisis and binding upon all courts.' [Citation.] Exhaustion of administrative remedies is, in short, 'a jurisdictional prerequisite to resort to the courts.' [Citatio

2010Resources Code,] § 21177, subd. (b).) The petitioner may allege as a ground of noncompliance any objection that was presented by any person or entity during the administrative proceedings.” (Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1184, 1199 [ 22 Cal.Rptr.3d 203 ].) “ ‘The petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating that the issues raised in the judicial proceeding were first raised at the administrative level. [Citation.]’ [Citation.] An appellate court employs a de novo standard of review when determining whether the exhaustion of administrative

2010Resources Code,] § 21177, subd. (b).) The petitioner may allege as a ground of noncompliance any objection that was presented by any person or entity during the administrative proceedings.” (Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1184, 1199 [ 22 Cal.Rptr.3d 203 ].) “ ‘The petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating that the issues raised in the judicial proceeding were first raised at the administrative level. [Citation.]’ [Citation.] An appellate court employs a de novo standard of review when determining whether the exhaustion of administrative

2010The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies "prevents courts from interfering with the subject matter of another tribunal" by giving the agency an opportunity to respond to factual issues and legal theories within its area of expertise before its actions are reviewed by a court. ( Lodi, supra, 144 Cal.App.4th at p. 874.) The exhaustion requirement also "`"facilitates the development of a complete record that draws on administrative expertise and promotes judicial efficiency." [Citation.] It can serve as a preliminary administrative sifting process [citation], unearthing the relevant

2010The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies "prevents courts from interfering with the subject matter of another tribunal" by giving the agency an opportunity to respond to factual issues and legal theories within its area of expertise before its actions are reviewed by a court. ( Lodi, supra, 144 Cal.App.4th at p. 874.) The exhaustion requirement also "`"facilitates the development of a complete record that draws on administrative expertise and promotes judicial efficiency." [Citation.] It can serve as a preliminary administrative sifting process [citation], unearthing the relevant

2025(See People v. Hannon (2016) 5 Cal.App.5th 94, 105 [“Courts generally do not consider new issues raised in amicus curiae briefs”]; accord, Crump v. Appellate Division of Superior Court (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 222, 251, fn. 11 .) In any event, the discussion in the brief is largely immaterial to the issue we find determinative, the exhaustion of administrative remedies rule. 12 p. 620.) Even when an administrative proceeding does not eliminate the possibility of a subsequent judicial action, it “will still promote judicial efficiency by unearthing the relevant evidence and by providing a record w

2025(See Westlake Community Hosp. v. Superior Court, supra, 17 Cal.3d at p. 476 [“by insisting upon exhaustion . . . courts accord recognition to the ‘expertise’ of the organization’s quasi-judicial tribunal, permitting it to adjudicate the merits of the plaintiff’s claim in the first instance”].) Because the allegations of the Petition do not support the conclusion that an administrative remedy is unavailable or inadequate, Najibi cannot avoid the exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine on this basis. 17 2.

2024In its respondent’s brief, Bridge correctly points out that UCF failed to exhaust its administrative remedies concerning the VMT analysis. 45 No one, including UCF, challenged the VMT analysis by commenting on it during the public comment period on the project. “ ‘Exhaustion of administrative remedies is a jurisdictional prerequisite to maintenance of a CEQA action.’ ” (California Native Plant Society v. City of Rancho Cordova (2009) 172 CalApp.4th 603, 615.) “ ‘The exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine “bars the pursuit of a judicial remedy by a person to whom administrative action w

2024In its respondent’s brief, Bridge correctly points out that UCF failed to exhaust its administrative remedies concerning the VMT analysis. 45 No one, including UCF, challenged the VMT analysis by commenting on it during the public comment period on the project. “ ‘Exhaustion of administrative remedies is a jurisdictional prerequisite to maintenance of a CEQA action.’ ” (California Native Plant Society v. City of Rancho Cordova (2009) 172 CalApp.4th 603, 615.) “ ‘The exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine “bars the pursuit of a judicial remedy by a person to whom administrative action w

2021Bd. of Directors (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 614, 623 (North Coast Rivers).) Thus, “the requirement of exhaustion is a jurisdictional prerequisite, and not a matter of judicial discretion.” (Tahoe Vista, supra, 81 Cal.App.4th at p. 589 ; accord, Clews Land & Livestock, LLC v. City of San Diego (2017) 19 Cal.App.5th 161, 184 (Clews Land); North Coast Rivers, supra, 216 Cal.App.4th at p. 624 .) “Inasmuch as the issue of exhaustion is a question of law, ‘[a]n appellate court employs a de novo standard of review when determining whether the exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine applies.’ ” (No

2021Bd. of Directors (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 614, 623 (North Coast Rivers).) Thus, “the requirement of exhaustion is a jurisdictional prerequisite, and not a matter of judicial discretion.” (Tahoe Vista, supra, 81 Cal.App.4th at p. 589 ; accord, Clews Land & Livestock, LLC v. City of San Diego (2017) 19 Cal.App.5th 161, 184 (Clews Land); North Coast Rivers, supra, 216 Cal.App.4th at p. 624 .) “Inasmuch as the issue of exhaustion is a question of law, ‘[a]n appellate court employs a de novo standard of review when determining whether the exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine applies.’ ” (No

2004The Business and Professions Code claim in count 2 is ‘originally cognizable in the courts,’’ and thus it triggers application of the primary jurisdiction doctrine.” (Farmers, supra, 2 Cal.4th at p. 391 , italics added.) As the court explained: “ ‘Both [the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies and the doctrine of primary jurisdiction] are essentially doctrines of comity between courts and agencies.

2002Exchange v. Superior Court, supra, 2 Cal.4th at p. 390.) The exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine is applied where an administrative agency must be the first body to consider a matter; the doctrine of primary jurisdiction applies where a claim can originally be addressed in a court, but would be better addressed first by an administrative body.

2026Applicable Law The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies (the doctrine) “refers to the requirement that administrative remedies be pursued as a jurisdictional prerequisite to seeking judicial relief from an administrative action.” (California Correctional Peace Officers Assn. v. State Personnel Bd. (1995) 10 Cal.4th 1133, 1148 .) “In general, a party must exhaust administrative remedies before resorting to the courts. [Citations.] Under this rule, an administrative remedy is exhausted only upon ‘termination of all available, nonduplicative administrative review procedures.’” (Coach

2021“In general, a party must exhaust administrative remedies before resorting to the courts.” (Coachella Valley Mosquito & Vector Control Dist. v. California Public Employment Relations Bd. (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1072, 1080 (Coachella Valley).) “Under this rule, an administrative remedy is exhausted only upon ‘termination of all available, nonduplicative administrative review procedures.’ [Citations.]” (Ibid.) “The . . . requirement applies to defenses as well as to claims for affirmative relief [citations], and . . . [is] ‘a jurisdictional prerequisite to resort to the courts’ [citations].” (Ibid.) T

2022“We therefore apply the de novo standard of review and give no deference to the trial court’s ruling.” (Wallich’s Ranch Co. v. Kern County Citrus Pest Control Dist. (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 878, 883 ; see also Citizens for Open Government v. City of Lodi (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 865, 873 [“We apply a de novo standard of review to the legal question of whether the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies in a given case.”].) Howard asserts he is excused from compliance with the exhaustion doctrine under the public interest exception set forth in Environmental Law Fund, Inc. v. Town

1992(United Farm Workers v. Superior Court, supra, 72 Cal.App.3d at pp. 272-273.) However, San Diego Teachers Assn. made clear that PERB preemption ultimately involves the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies, by *168 explaining it was unnecessary to consider the legality of public employee strikes “if the injunctive remedies were improper because of the district’s failure to exhaust its administrative remedies under the EERA.” (San Diego Teachers Assn. v. Superior Court, supra, 24 Cal.3d at p. 7 , citing Environmental Law Fund, Inc. v. Town of Corte Madera (1975) 49 Cal.App.3d 105, 1

2022Resources Code, §] 21167 unless the alleged grounds for noncompliance with this division were presented to the public agency orally or in writing by any person during the public comment period provided by this division or before the close of the public hearing on the project before the issuance of the notice of determination.”]; see Tomlinson v. County of Alameda (2012) 54 Cal.4th 281, 291 [“the exhaustion-of-administrative-remedies requirement set forth in subdivision (a) of [Pub.

2022Resources Code, §] 21167 unless the alleged grounds for noncompliance with this division were presented to the public agency orally or in writing by any person during the public comment period provided by this division or before the close of the public hearing on the project before the issuance of the notice of determination.”]; see Tomlinson v. County of Alameda (2012) 54 Cal.4th 281, 291 [“the exhaustion-of-administrative-remedies requirement set forth in subdivision (a) of [Pub.

2025Suspension of staff privileges A doctor who challenges a suspension of staff privileges “must pursue the internal remedies afforded by that hospital to a final decision on the merits before resorting to the courts for relief.” (Unnamed Physician, supra, 93 Cal.App.4th at p. 619 ; accord, Eight Unnamed Physicians, supra, 150 Cal.App.4th at p. 511 .) While the exhaustion of administrative remedies rule does not apply when an administrative remedy is unavailable or inadequate (Tiernan v. Trustees of Cal. State University & Colleges (1982) 33 Cal.3d 211, 217 ), Najibi does not—and presently cannot

2013(See Unnamed Physician v. Board of Trustees (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 607, 620 [ 113 Cal.Rptr.2d 309 ].) Because we have determined that the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies does not apply in this case, this issue is moot and we need not address it.

2023The exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional: a court cannot hear a case before a litigant exhausts administrative 7 remedies.” (Wright v. State of California (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 659, 664-665 (Wright); see also In re Serna (1978) 76 Cal.App.3d 1010, 1014 [“The well established doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies to grievances lodged by prisoners [citations], even when the grievances involve an alleged constitutional violation”].) California prison regulations provide prisoners with the ability to submit a written grievance or complaint “to dispute a [CDCR] policy, deci

2023The exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional: a court cannot hear a case before a litigant exhausts administrative 7 remedies.” (Wright v. State of California (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 659, 664-665 (Wright); see also In re Serna (1978) 76 Cal.App.3d 1010, 1014 [“The well established doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies to grievances lodged by prisoners [citations], even when the grievances involve an alleged constitutional violation”].) California prison regulations provide prisoners with the ability to submit a written grievance or complaint “to dispute a [CDCR] policy, deci

2021In Rojo v. Kliger (1990) 52 Cal.3d 65 , the Supreme Court stated that “exhaustion of administrative remedies furthers a number of important societal and governmental interests, including: (1) bolstering administrative autonomy; (2) permitting the agency to resolve factual issues, apply its expertise and exercise statutorily delegated remedies; (3) mitigating damages; and (4) promoting judicial economy.” (Id. at p. 86; see Asimow et al., California Practice Guide: Administrative Law (The Rutter Group 2020) ¶¶ 15:12 to 15:15, pp. 15-2 to 15-3 [rationales for exhaustion doctrine are promoting eff

2011(Jonathan Neil, supra, 33 Cal.4th at p. 931 ; Rojo v. Kliger, supra, 52 Cal.3d at p. 87.) “In such cases, although the legislative intent to [require] resort in the first instance to administrative remedies is not entirely clear, courts have required exhaustion when they ‘have expressly or implicitly determined that the administrative agency possesses a specialized and specific body of expertise in a field that particularly equips it to handle the subject matter of the dispute.’ ” (Jonathan Neil, supra, at p. 931 .) Exhaustion may be required if the application of the agency’s expertise to the

2023The exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine “(1) . . . serves the salutary function of mitigating damages; (2) . . . recognizes the quasi-judicial tribunal’s expertise; and (3) . . . promotes judicial economy by unearthing the relevant evidence and by providing a record should there be a review of the case.” (Campbell v. Regents of University of California (2005) 35 Cal.4th 311, 322 ; see Penal Code § 5058 [authorizing CDCR secretary to “prescribe and amend rules and regulations . . . for the administration of the parole of persons sentenced” like Huff]; see In re Prather (2010) 50 Cal.

2013(Coachella Valley Mosquito & Vector Control Dist. v. California Public Employment Relations Bd. (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1072, 1080 [ 29 Cal.Rptr.3d 234 , 112 P.3d 623 ].) More specifically, “ ‘[t]he doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies requires that where a remedy before an administrative agency is provided by statute, regulation, or ordinance, relief must be sought by exhausting this remedy before the courts will act.’ [Citation.]” (Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. Superior Court (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 85, 99-100 [ 26 Cal.Rptr.3d 744 ].) The “failure to exhaust administrative remedies is

2025(Compare § 1085 with § 1094.5, subd. (a).) That argument fails to account for the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies. “ ‘[E]xhaustion of . . . administrative remedies’ . . . refers to the requirement that administrative remedies be pursued as a jurisdictional prerequisite to seeking judicial relief from an administrative action.” (California Correctional Peace Officers Assn. v. State Personnel Bd. (1995) 10 Cal.4th 1133, 1148 , second ellipsis added.) It “is a closely related concept to finality.” (California Water, supra, 161 Cal.App.4th at p. 1489 .) Moreover, the doctrine app

2024(SJCBC, supra, 201 Cal.App.4th at p. 350 , quoting Newhall County, supra, 161 Cal.App.4th at p. 1485 .) “ ‘The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies is a closely related concept to finality.

2021(Ibid.) “Whether the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies in a given case is a legal question that we review de novo.” (Coastside Fishing Club v. California Fish & Game Com. (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 397, 414 .) However, the legal question of whether California’s exhaustion doctrine applies to inmate grievances has been answered many times.

2021(Kim v. Konad USA Distribution, Inc. (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1336, 1345 .) “Whether the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies in a given case is a legal question that we review de novo.” (Coastside Fishing Club v. California Fish & Game Com. (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 397, 414 .) 11.

2026Appellants waived their arguments as to respondent’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies A. Standard of review and applicable law “‘We apply a de novo standard of review to the legal question of whether the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies in a given case.’” (Monterey Coastkeeper v. Monterey County Water Resources Agency (2017) 18 Cal.App.5th 1, 12 .) Further, “[q]uestions of subject matter jurisdiction are questions of law, which are reviewed de novo.” (Tearlach Resources Limited v. Western States Internat., Inc. (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 773, 780 .) “‘The exhaust

2026Appellants waived their arguments as to respondent’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies A. Standard of review and applicable law “‘We apply a de novo standard of review to the legal question of whether the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies in a given case.’” (Monterey Coastkeeper v. Monterey County Water Resources Agency (2017) 18 Cal.App.5th 1, 12 .) Further, “[q]uestions of subject matter jurisdiction are questions of law, which are reviewed de novo.” (Tearlach Resources Limited v. Western States Internat., Inc. (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 773, 780 .) “‘The exhaust

2017(See Defend Our Waterfront v. State Lands Com. (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 570 , 580, 192 Cal.Rptr.3d 790 ( Defend O ur Waterfront ); see also *866 Coastside Fishing Club v. California Fish & Game Com. (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 397 , 414, 155 Cal.Rptr.3d 426 [noting "[w]hether the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies in a given *204 case is a legal question that we review de novo"].) The exhaustion requirement is subject to exceptions, one of which is where the administrative remedy is inadequate. ( City of San Jose , supra , 49 Cal.4th at p. 609 , 110 Cal.Rptr.3d 718 , 232 P.3d 7

2017(See Defend Our Waterfront v. State Lands Com. (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 570 , 580, 192 Cal.Rptr.3d 790 ( Defend O ur Waterfront ); see also *866 Coastside Fishing Club v. California Fish & Game Com. (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 397 , 414, 155 Cal.Rptr.3d 426 [noting "[w]hether the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies in a given *204 case is a legal question that we review de novo"].) The exhaustion requirement is subject to exceptions, one of which is where the administrative remedy is inadequate. ( City of San Jose , supra , 49 Cal.4th at p. 609 , 110 Cal.Rptr.3d 718 , 232 P.3d 7

2022The exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine requires “[a]dministrative agencies [to] be given the opportunity to reach a reasoned and final conclusion on each and every issue upon which they have jurisdiction to act before those issues are raised in a judicial forum.” (Sierra Club v. San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Com. (1999) 21 Cal.4th 489, 510 .) “The rule is a jurisdictional prerequisite in the sense that it ‘is not a matter of judicial discretion, but is a fundamental rule of procedure laid down by courts of last resort, followed under the doctrine of stare decisis, and binding

2010The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies "prevents courts from interfering with the subject matter of another tribunal" by giving the agency an opportunity to respond to factual issues and legal theories within its area of expertise before its actions are reviewed by a court. ( Lodi, supra, 144 Cal.App.4th at p. 874.) The exhaustion requirement also "`"facilitates the development of a complete record that draws on administrative expertise and promotes judicial efficiency." [Citation.] It can serve as a preliminary administrative sifting process [citation], unearthing the relevant