Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_98-cv-01489/USCOURTS-caed-2_98-cv-01489-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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 

Case No. CIV S-98-1489 FCD JFM 

[PROPOSED] ORDER AND JUDGMENT 

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY, 

a California corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CITY OF LODI, CALIFORNIA, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. CIV. S-98-1489 FCD JFM 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT 

. 

WHEREAS:

1. Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company (“Fireman’s Fund”) brought this suit 

challenging the City of Lodi’s Comprehensive Municipal Environmental Response and Liability 

Ordinance (“MERLO”), and its alleged selective enforcement, on federal and state preemption 

and other grounds. 

2. The Ninth Circuit decision in Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. v. City of Lodi, 302 

F.3d 928, 947-52 (9th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 961 (2003), and this Court’s decision on 

remand, Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. v. City of Lodi, 296 F. Supp. 2d 1197, 1206-07 (E. D. Cal. 

2003) (as modified on November 17, 2004) resolved Fireman’s Fund’s first claim and some or 

all of its second claim for relief, based on whether or not there was preemption by the federal 

Case 2:98-cv-01489-FCD-JFM Document 173 Filed 11/09/05 Page 1 of 3
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 

2 

Case No. CIV S-98-1489 FCD JFM 

[PROPOSED] ORDER AND JUDGMENT 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), the 

California Hazardous Substances Account Act (“HSAA”) or by California Insurance Code 

§ 11580. See Complaint ¶¶ 43-84. 

3. On May 5, 2004, the California Court of Appeal held in City of Lodi v. 

Randtron, 118 Cal. App. 4th 337 (2004) that MERLO in its entirety is preempted by HSAA and 

is invalid. 

4. The parties acknowledge and agree that the opinion in Randtron is binding 

on the City of Lodi. 

5. Firemen’s Fund has agreed to settle its claim for attorneys’ fees and costs 

against the City of Lodi arising from work on this case for one million dollars ($1,000,000.00). 

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED:

6. All of Fireman’s Fund’s remaining claims are dismissed as moot. 

7. This Order and the Permanent Injunction entered by this Court on 

December 22, 2003, and modified by Stipulation and Order dated November 17, 2004, shall be 

entered by the Clerk as the Final Judgment in this action. 

8. This Court shall retain jurisdiction over the case and the parties to enforce 

the Permanent Injunction. 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 2:98-cv-01489-FCD-JFM Document 173 Filed 11/09/05 Page 2 of 3
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 

Case No. CIV S-98-1489 FCD JFM 

[PROPOSED] ORDER AND JUDGMENT 

DATED: October 31, 2005 

BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP 

By: /s/ 

Terry J. Houlihan 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE 

COMPANY 

DATED: October 21, 2005 

FOLGER LEVIN & KAHN LLP 

By: Gregory Call 

Gregory Call 

Attorneys for Defendant 

CITY OF LODI 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED: 

DATED: November 8, 2005 /s/Frank C. Damrell, Jr.

 Honorable Frank C. Damrell, Jr. 

 United States District Court Judge 

Case 2:98-cv-01489-FCD-JFM Document 173 Filed 11/09/05 Page 3 of 3