ELR Citation: 48 ELR 20017
No(s). 1:11-CV-1257 (E.D. Cal. Feb 2, 2018) (Ishii, J.)

A district court held that a California city does not have to pay a settlement to a dry cleaner for chemical contamination near his property per a condition of their settlement agreement. After discovering a perchloroethylene (PCE) contamination plume in downtown Visalia, California, the California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) cited the dry cleaner for the release. After investigation, the dry cleaner brought a CERCLA contribution claim against the city, arguing that sewer leaks further spread the PCE. The city contended that the dry cleaner improperly disposed of PCE into the sewers. In October 2017, the city and the dry cleaner reached a settlement agreement, stating that in exchange for $300,000 paid to the dry cleaner, both parties would drop all suits. The city argued that it did not have to pay the settlement as the agreement was predicated on reaching an agreement with its insurers and the dry cleaner filing a dismissal of his claims. The court agreed, holding that the express condition in the contract had not been satisfied and thus the city is not liable.