Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-1_05-cv-02739/USCOURTS-cand-1_05-cv-02739-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 895
Nature of Suit: Freedom of Information Act of 1974
Cause of Action: 05:552 Freedom of Information 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

27

28

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF COMPROMISE SETTLEMENT - C 05-2739 NJV 1

CHRISTOPHER J. NEARY (CSBN 95490)

110 South Main Street, Suite C

Willits, CA 95490

Telephone: (707) 459-5551

Attorney for Plaintiff North Coast Railroad Authority, a Public Agency

KEVIN V. RYAN (CSBN 118321)

United States Attorney

JOANN M. SWANSON (CSBN 88143)

Chief, Civil Division

JULIE A. ARBUCKLE (CSBN 193425)

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7073

Fax: (415) 436-7102

Attorneys for Defendant United States Coast Guard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NORTH COAST RAILROAD

AUTHORITY, a public agency,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 05-2739 NJV

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER OF COMPROMISE

SETTLEMENT

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, after full and open

discussion, that the above-captioned action brought pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act

(“FOIA”) be settled and compromised on the following terms:

1. Defendant United States Coast Guard (the “Coast Guard”) shall produce to

Plaintiff North Coast Railroad Authority’s (“Plaintiff”) counsel, Christopher J. Neary, the Coast

Guard’s Report of Investigation files concerning the allisions with the Black Point Railroad

Bridge on June 11, 2002, April 20, 2003, November 28, 2003, July 3, 2004, and October 26,

2004 after redacting the names, addresses, telephone numbers and other identifying information

protected by the privacy rights of third parties under FOIA, the Privacy Act, and/or the

Case 1:05-cv-02739-NJV Document 22 Filed 12/06/05 Page 1 of 5
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF COMPROMISE SETTLEMENT - C 05-2739 NJV 2

Constitution. No responsive records were found for allisions occurring during June 2004 or on

December 1, 2004. The parties agree that the production of these documents is in exchange for

Plaintiff releasing and dismissing all claims alleged in the Complaint it filed in the abovecaptioned case on July 5, 2005, and all claims for attorneys' fees, costs, and any other form of

legal or equitable recovery relating to or arising out of the FOIA requests to the Coast Guard

dated April 28, 2003, April 29, 2003, April 30, 2003, May 6, 2003, January 27, 2005, and

March 1, 2005. The parties each agree to bear their own costs and attorney’s fees arising out of

all stages of litigation, including but not limited to the processing of the Plaintiff's

administrative requests, and district court Complaint in connection with the above-captioned

action.

2. Plaintiff will accept the terms described in paragraph 1 in full settlement and

satisfaction of any and all claims and demands which it, its attorneys, successors, or assignees

may now have or hereafter acquire against Defendants the Coast Guard, United States of

America, and/or any of their past and present officials, agents, employees, attorneys, or insurers

that relate to or arise out of the FOIA requests to the Coast Guard dated April 28, 2003, April

29, 2003, April 30, 2003, May 6, 2003, January 27, 2005, and March 1, 2005.

3. In consideration of this Agreement and production of the documents referenced

in paragraph 1, Plaintiff agrees that upon its counsel’s receipt of such documents, it’s counsel

will execute and e-file a Stipulation of Dismissal and [Proposed] Order requesting that the

entire above-captioned action be dismissed with prejudice consistent with the terms of this

Agreement.

4. Plaintiff agrees that it has not filed and will not file any other charges,

complaints, lawsuits, or other claims that relate to or arise out of the FOIA requests to the Coast

Guard dated April 28, 2003, April 29, 2003, April 30, 2003, May 6, 2003, January 27, 2005,

and March 1, 2005. Plaintiff agrees to cooperate with the Coast Guard in connection with

taking whatever steps are necessary to obtain the dismissal with prejudice of any such charges,

complaints, lawsuits, or other claims.

5. Plaintiff hereby releases and forever discharges the Coast Guard, the United

Case 1:05-cv-02739-NJV Document 22 Filed 12/06/05 Page 2 of 5
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF COMPROMISE SETTLEMENT - C 05-2739 NJV 3

States, and any and all of their past and present officials, agents, employees, attorneys, insurers,

their successors and assigns, from any and all obligations, damages, liabilities, actions, causes

of actions, claims and demands of any kind and nature whatsoever, whether suspected or

unsuspected, at law or in equity, or known or unknown, which arise from or relate to the FOIA

requests to the Coast Guard dated April 28, 2003, April 29, 2003, April 30, 2003, May 6, 2003,

January 27, 2005, and March 1, 2005. 

6. The provisions of California Civil Code Section 1542 are set forth below:

"A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor

does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of

executing the release, which if known by him must have

materially affected his settlement with the debtor."

Plaintiff has been informed of the statutory language of Civil Code Section 1542, and fully

understanding the same, nevertheless elects to waive the benefits of any and all rights it may

have pursuant to the provision of that statute and any similar provision of federal law to the

extent it concerns claims that arise from or relate to the FOIA requests to the Coast Guard dated

April 28, 2003, April 29, 2003, April 30, 2003, May 6, 2003, January 27, 2005, and March 1,

2005 only. Plaintiff understands that, if the facts concerning such claims and the liability of the

government for such claims are found hereinafter to be other than or different from the facts

now believed by it to be true, this Agreement shall be and remain effective notwithstanding

such material difference.

7. This Agreement may be pled as a full and complete defense to any subsequent

action or other proceeding involving any person or party that arises out of the claims released

and discharged herein.

8. This Agreement is a compromise settlement of disputed claims and demands,

which settlement does not constitute an admission of liability or fault on the part of the Coast

Guard, the United States, or any of their past and present officials, agents, employees, attorneys,

or insurers on account of the events described in Plaintiff's Complaint in the above-captioned

action.

Case 1:05-cv-02739-NJV Document 22 Filed 12/06/05 Page 3 of 5
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF COMPROMISE SETTLEMENT - C 05-2739 NJV 4

9. Plaintiff acknowledges and agrees that it has thoroughly reviewed the entire

Agreement, has discussed its terms with its attorney, and understands its provisions.

10. The parties agree that should any dispute arise with respect to the

implementation of the terms of this Agreement, Plaintiff shall not seek to rescind the Agreement

and pursue its original cause(s) of action. Plaintiff's sole remedy in such a dispute is an action

to enforce the Agreement in district court. The parties agree that the district court will retain

jurisdiction over this matter for the purposes of resolving any dispute alleging a breach of this

Agreement.

11. Each party hereby stipulates that it is fully aware of and understands all of the

terms of the Agreement and the legal consequences thereof. It is acknowledged that the parties

hereto have mutually participated in the preparation of this Agreement, and it is agreed that no

provision hereof shall be construed against any party hereto by virtue of the activities of that

party or her/its attorney.

12. If any provision of this Agreement shall be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the

validity, legality, and enforceability of the remaining provision shall not in any way be affected

or impaired thereby.

13. This instrument shall constitute the entire Agreement between the parties, and it

is expressly understood and agreed that the Agreement has been freely and voluntarily entered

into by the parties hereto. The parties further acknowledge that no warranties or representations

have been made on any subject other than as set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement may

not be altered, modified or otherwise changed in any respect except by writing, duly executed

by all of the parties or their authorized representatives.

14. Any requests that Plaintiff makes under the Freedom of Information Act for the 

Coast Guard’s Report of Investigation files concerning a particular allision with the Black Point

Railroad Bridge should be sent to the United States Coast Guard, Attn: FOIA Office, Room

6106, 2100 Second Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20593, after Plaintiff has made a reasonably

diligent effort to confirm that the Coast Guard in fact conducted an investigation into the

particular allision. The Coast Guard reserves the right to object to any such requests from

Case 1:05-cv-02739-NJV Document 22 Filed 12/06/05 Page 4 of 5
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF COMPROMISE SETTLEMENT - C 05-2739 NJV 5

Plaintiff on the grounds that there is an open investigation, the requested documents are

protected by the privacy rights of third parties, and/or otherwise exempt from production under

the Freedom of Information Act or other applicable law.

Dated: November 29, 2005 KEVIN V. RYAN

United States Attorney

_________/s/__________

JULIE A. ARBUCKLE

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Defendant United States of America

Dated: November 28, 2005 NORTH COAST RAILROAD AUTHORITY

________/s/___________

By: Mitch Stogner

Its: Executive Director

Plaintiff

Approved:

Dated: November 22, 2005

__________/s/__________

CHRISTOPHER J. NEARY

Attorney for Plaintiff North Coast Railroad Authority

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:_______________

 NANDOR J. VADAS

 United States Magistrate Judge

12/5/05

Case 1:05-cv-02739-NJV Document 22 Filed 12/06/05 Page 5 of 5