The passage of the National Environmental Policy Act¹ compelled the adjustment of traditional legal doctrines in order to accommodate the concerns of environmentalists. The courts expanded long-standing notions of justiciability,² standing,³ and irreparable injury⁴ to allow representation of environmental interests to the degree previously accorded the representation of economic interests. But these changes in legal doctrines were not the only changes in the legal system that NEPA litigation has brought about. The tremendous variety among environmental groups and ideologies, the wide range of federal projects arguably subject to NEPA, and the simple fact that it is often non-economic interests that are being asserted, all point toward a modification of traditional forms in such matters as attorney-client relationships and settlements.

This Article examines the impact of these new interests on the settlement process. It will attempt to differentiate those environmental interests that create pressure for settlement from those interests that pose obstacles to it. The relationship between the environmentalist client and attorney during settlement negotiations will be examined, both as a factor in determining the likelihood and shape of any settlement and for the insights it provides into the particularities of environmental litigation. The Article will also discuss the impact of settlements on the prospects for plaintiffs' recovery of attorneys fees and the award of declaratory judgments.