ELR Citation: ELR 20357
No(s). CV 90-3122 AAH (JRx) (C.D. Cal. Apr 26, 1993)

The court approves a proposed consent decree in a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) action resulting from early settlement negotiations between the United States, California, and local governmental entities over the objection of nonsettling private defendants. The court holds that the settlement is fair, reasonable, and consistent with the purposes of CERCLA. The court holds that it would be contrary to CERCLA's primary goal of encouraging early settlement to require, prior to approval of a settlement, precise information about the relative culpability of different defendants and the total harm caused. The court next holds that the proposed consent decree is the product of a procedurally fair process, negotiated at arm's-length, adversarially, and between experienced counsel. The court also holds that the proposed decree is substantively fair, because the methodology used by the government to arrive at the settlement figures is explained in detail, and so long as the method appears to be reasonable, the court should not interfere with the government's determinations, especially when buttressed by the recommendation of a special master. Finally, the court holds that settlements should not be subjected to "precision-seeking, nit-picking line-item scrutiny."

Counsel for Plaintiffs
Adam Kushner, Sharon Zamore
Environment and Natural Resources Division
U.S. Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 514-2000

Counsel for Defendants
Frank Rothman, Jose R. Allen
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom
Four Embarcadero Ctr., San Francisco CA 94111
(415) 984-6400
Karl S. Lytz, Kimberly M. McCormick
Latham & Watkins
701 B St., Ste. 2100, San Diego CA 92101
(619) 236-1234