Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_00-cv-02441/USCOURTS-caed-2_00-cv-02441-20/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 28:2201 Constitutionality of State Statute(s)

---

Farella Braun & Martel LLP 

Russ Building, 30th Floor 

235 Montgomery Street 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 954-4400

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 

James A. Bruen (State Bar No. 43880) 

James H. Colopy (State Bar No. 172806) 

Ruth Ann Castro (State Bar No. 209448) 

Farella Braun & Martel LLP 

Russ Building, 17th Floor 

235 Montgomery Street 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 954-4400 

Facsimile: (415) 954-4480 

Attorneys for Defendant 

GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CORPORATION, 

successor in interest to GENERAL ELECTRIC 

CREDIT CORPORATION 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; and 

CITY OF LODI, CALIFORNIA, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

M & P INVESTMENTS, a California Partnership 

in Dissolution; et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. CIV-S-00-2441 FCD JFM 

ORDER APPROVING 

SETTLEMENT AND 

CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION 

Date: August 18, 2006 

Time: 10:00 a.m. 

Place: Courtroom 2 

Judge:Frank C. Damrell, Jr. 

AND RELATED CROSS-CLAIMS, 

COUNTERCLAIMS, THIRD-PARTY CLAIMS, 

AND FOURTH-PARTY CLAIMS. 

The City of Lodi (the “City”), Defendant General Electric Capital Corporation, successor 

in interest to General Electric Credit Corporation (“GE Capital”), and Defendant Harman 

Managers Investment, Ltd. (“Harman Managers”) have entered into a settlement of this matter. 

After consideration of GE Capital’s Motion for Order Approving Settlement and Contribution 

Protection (“GE Capital’s Motion”), and the Joinders of the City and Harman Managers thereto, 

and the record as a whole, the Court finds that the settlement, as embodied in the Settlement 

Agreement and Release (“Settlement Agreement”) set forth in Exhibit "A" to the Declaration of 

Ruth Ann Castro in support of GE Capital’s Motion, was made in good faith within the meaning 

of California Code of Civil Procedure section 877.6 and is fair, reasonable and consistent with the 

Case 2:00-cv-02441-FCD-KJM Document 2860 Filed 08/11/06 Page 1 of 2
Farella Braun & Martel LLP 

Russ Building, 30th Floor 

235 Montgomery Street 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 954-4400

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 

 

- 2 - 

purposes of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act 

("CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq.

The matter having been briefed and submitted for decision, and good cause appearing: 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT GE Capital’s Motion be GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 

1. The Court finds and determines that the Settlement Agreement has been entered 

into in good faith within the meaning of Section 877 and 877.6 of the California Code of Civil 

Procedure. 

2. Section 6 of the Uniform Comparative Fault Act ("UCFA"), 12 U.L.A. 147 (1996), 

in pertinent part, is hereby adopted as the federal common law in this case for the purpose of 

determining the legal effect of the Settlement Agreement. 

3. Pursuant to Section 6 of UCFA and Section 877.6 of the California Code of Civil 

Procedure, any and all claims for contribution or indemnity against GE Capital, as defined in the 

Settlement Agreement, arising out of the facts alleged in the Fourth Amended Complaint filed by 

the City and in the Third-Party Cross-Complaint filed by Harman Managers, and as further 

identified and provided for in the Settlement Agreement, the terms of which are incorporated 

herein, regardless of when such claims were asserted or by whom, are barred. Such claims are 

barred regardless of whether they are brought pursuant to CERCLA or pursuant to any other 

federal or state law. 

4. Any and all claims asserted by the City, by Harman Managers, or by any other 

party against GE Capital are hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED 

DATED: August 11, 2006 /s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:00-cv-02441-FCD-KJM Document 2860 Filed 08/11/06 Page 2 of 2