In Benetatos v. City of Los Angeles, published April 14, 2015, the Second District Court of Appeal, Division Five, affirmed a trial court decision denying a petition for writ of administrative mandate that sought to overturn the respondent city's determination that the petitioner's fast food restaurant constituted a nuisance, due to third-party criminal activity on and around the property, and the city's imposition of conditions on the restaurant's continued operation. The restaurant contended that the trial court erred in applying a substantial evidence standard of review (under which the city's determination is upheld if any substantial evidence supports it) instead of a de novo standard of review (in which the trial court exercises its independent judgment on the evidence). The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision. The de novo standard of review applies to review of decisions affecting fundamental vested rights, such as whether a business will continue to operate. The petitioner failed to present evidence that the conditions imposed would severely affect the restaurant's ability to operate or drive it out of business. The substantial-evidence standard for decisions affecting economic issues therefore applied. The appellate court found substantial evidence in the record supporting the city's determination of a nuisance and the conditions the city imposed.