ELR Citation: ELR 20199
No(s). 5:89 CV 1866 (N.D. Ohio Jun 21, 1996)

The court enters a proposed order approving settlement agreements that resolve several parties' liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) for response costs incurred at the Fields Brook site in Ohio. A nonsettling party challenged the agreements, alleging that they may subject it to disproportionate liability from inconsistent applications of the Uniform Comparative Fault Act (UCFA) and the Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act (UCATA). The proposed approval order provides that the UCFA applies to determine the effect of the agreements. The proposed order, however, leaves open the question whether the UCATA should apply to determine the effect of the agreements on outstanding U.S. claims. The court first holds that the nonsettling party's that the United States at some future date would initiate an enforcement action, reach an inadequate settlement with the settling parties, and seek the remaining balance from it does not warrant any change in the proposed order. The nonsettling party chose not to participate in the arbitration process and chose not to join the group of parties that proposed the order. Moreover, the nonsettling party failed to show that the order would conflict with Congress' judgment that nonsettlors should bear the risk of increased liability in a government enforcement action. The court next holds that the agreements are fair and reasonable and meet CERCLA's requirements even though they do not disclose the settlement amount. The parties that proposed the order and bear that risk of collecting too little have every incentive to ensure that each settling party pays its full share.

Counsel for Plaintiff
Leonard M. Gelman
Environment and Natural Resources Division
U.S. Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 514-2000

Counsel for Defendants
Ralph E. Cascarilla
Walter & Haverfield
1300 Terminal Tower, Cleveland OH 44113
(216) 781-1212