Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00491/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00491-13/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 42:6901 Environmental Cleanup Expenses

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

STEPHEN C. LYON, et al.,

Defendants.

______________________________

AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS AND

THIRD-PARTY ACTIONS.

 

CASE NO. CV F 07-0491 LJO GSA

(GGH)

ORDER RE INITIAL MEDIATION/ 

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

On May 28, 2008, the undersigned participated in a phone

conference with attorneys for Plaintiff, United States,

defendants, et al., Stephen Lyon, Suzanne Lyon, Russel Tonda,

Diane Tonda, and defendants, et al., Estate of Jamnadas, Rajendra

Jamnadas. After discussion, the court determined as follows:

Case 1:07-cv-00491-LJO -MJS Document 280 Filed 05/30/08 Page 1 of 6
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

For ease of terminology, “settlement process” means 1

“mediation process” as well.

2

1. To commence a mediation/settlement process with less 1

than all potentially viable and liable parties makes little sense

from the court perspective;

2. All parties set forth above and those parties identified

at pages 2:13-3:15, (i.e., up to and including line 15 on page 3)

of the Joint Status Report filed May 20, 2008, through their

counsel (no appearance of the party required at this time), shall

meet in the undersigned’s Sacramento courtroom on June 30, 2008,

at 9:30 a.m. in order to attempt agreement on a process of

settlement. This includes the City of Modesto and Univar, named,

but presently unserved (although participating) parties. The

undersigned is aware that there is probably no date which is

convenient to all counsel, nevertheless a settlement process must

be commenced as soon as possible. Therefore, the above date is

firm and will not be changed absent extraordinary circumstances. 

Not all counsel for a party need appear; it is sufficient that

each party be represented by a counsel.

3. The undersigned has no expectation to be able to

facilitate settlement of the substantive issues themselves at an

initial conference. Rather, all should strive to agree on a

process for settlement, including decisions on whether settlement

negotiations should proceed on a scheduled priority of issues,

the need for initial pro rata common funding of common

investigative issues (if any) with a promise of equitable

Case 1:07-cv-00491-LJO -MJS Document 280 Filed 05/30/08 Page 2 of 6
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

3

apportionment at a later time; creation of settlement groups

amongst the defendant parties from which a negotiation committee

can be selected, a stay of the litigation and discovery,

provisions for adjudication of discrete legal issues, the need

for a “settlement expert,” if any, and the like.

4. Key to a successful settlement process is for the

parties to actually grasp what they intellectually know --

litigation costs in this case may well exceed any party’s

liability share at the end of the day -- even if a party is

ultimately “successful”; the docket in this case with its

blizzard of pleadings to date, with no discovery or substantive

issues decided to date, certainly indicates the potential for

such.

5. No later than June 19, 2008, each party shall file a

report responding to the matters identified below; if allied

parties desire to file joint statements, the undersigned

encourages those filings in lieu of individual filings. The

parties shall not file the reports on the court docket, but shall

electronically mail the reports to ghollows@caed.uscourts.gov.

The parties are cautioned to observe what they already know:

Settlement in this case can only take place with a rational

assessment of the issues, and a rational assessment for the

issues cannot take place with pertinent evidence/issues hidden. 

All reports submitted to the undersigned are to be used solely

for the purposes of settlement, and may not be used for any other

purpose, notwithstanding any generally permitted uses outside of

Case 1:07-cv-00491-LJO -MJS Document 280 Filed 05/30/08 Page 3 of 6
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

Similarly, all verbal discussions in the court settlement 2

process, and those out-of- court verbal or written discussions

which are clearly directed at this settlement process and

identified as such shall remain confidential and inadmissible in

litigation.

4

settlement negotiations. Therefore, although the undersigned 2

will not require service on all parties of each report, the

reports should be generally served unless extraordinary

circumstances weigh against such service. The parties shall

discuss:

a. The disputes, if any, concerning the “chemical facts on

the ground,” i.e., whether there is a dispute about the presence

of PCE in the ground/groundwater in or about the area of what was

known as the Halford dry cleaning business (or whatever name if

operated at that same location);

b. The disputes, if any, concerning the historical

transmission of PCE into the sewer system proximate to the

Halford dry cleaning business;

c. disputes about improper disposal of PCE versus machinery

defects causing leakage of PCE; 

d. Whether the realistic potential exists for sources of PCE

contamination distinct from the Halford dry cleaning business

location, or contamination other than PCE which requires clean-up

in any event and which has co-mingled with the alleged Halford

PCE contamination;

e. Whether bona fide legal defenses to any complaint,

counter-claim, cross-claim or third party claim exist which are

Case 1:07-cv-00491-LJO -MJS Document 280 Filed 05/30/08 Page 4 of 6
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

5

independent from assertions of the substantive contamination

allegations; that is, the court is not concerned in this

paragraph with assertions of fact that one did not participate

directly or indirectly in the mechanism or methodology which

allegedly caused PCE contamination;

f. Whether a party disputes having been part of a cause of

the contamination alleged in the complaint, and the basis of that

dispute; settlement will not be aided by general denials based on

assertions of a plaintiff’s, et al., lack of proof at this point. 

“Cause” means any activity which could make one liable in any

manner for the alleged PCE contamination;

g. whether the related (somewhat) state action gives rise

to any legitimate claims of collateral estoppel;

h. Any other fact or issue which may facilitate a better

understanding of the issues pertinent to settlement

5. The United States shall discuss the remediation measures

it has undertaken, and expects to take in the future as well as

when closure of the remediation can be expected. If a summary

report exists, detailing the past, present, and future remedial

efforts which is not protectable work product, the United States

shall produce that report for all parties and the undersigned no

later than June 12, 2008. If the report has been publicly

disseminated in connection with prior administrative proceedings

or public hearings, the report need not be served on the parties

herein; however, the undersigned would appreciate a copy. Even

if the report could be considered work product, the United States

Case 1:07-cv-00491-LJO -MJS Document 280 Filed 05/30/08 Page 5 of 6
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

6

may well decide to release such a report in order to facilitate

early settlement.

6. For planning purposes, the court will schedule the first

substantive settlement proceedings sometime during the dates

August 18-25, 2008. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated:05/30/08

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows 

______________________________

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:07-cv-00491-LJO -MJS Document 280 Filed 05/30/08 Page 6 of 6