Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-04571/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-04571-21/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 42:9601 CERCLA

---

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

___________ 1

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR FILING AMENDED THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT OF CITY, Case No. CV-08-4571 MMC 

MORIS DAVIDOVITZ, ESQ. (State Bar #70581)

CHARLES BOLCOM, ESQ. (State Bar #193762)

DAVIDOVITZ & BENNETT LLP

One Embarcadero Center, Suite 750

San Francisco, California 94111

Telephone: (415) 956-4800

Facsimile: (415) 788-5948

Attorneys for Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff

CITY OF EUREKA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KFD ENTERPRISES, INC., a California

Corporation dba Norman’s Dry Cleaner,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF EUREKA,

Defendant.

_____________________________________

CITY OF EUREKA,

 Counter-Claimant and Third-Party Plaintiff

vs.

KFD ENTERPRISES, INC., a California

Corporation dba Norman’s Dry Cleaner,

Unocal Corporation,

Cross-Defendant and Third Party

Defendant

_____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. CV-08-4571 MMC

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED

ORDER FOR FILING AMENDED

THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT BY

DEFENDANT CITY OF EUREKA AS

TO THIRD PARTY DEFENDANT

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOLUTIONS,

INC.

[CIVIL C.R. 7-12]

Third-Party Defendant, Counter-Claimant and Cross-Defendant Environmental

Resolutions, Inc. and Defendant, Third Party Plaintiff, and Counter Defendant City of Eureka

hereby stipulate as follows:

Case 3:08-cv-04571-SC Document 213 Filed 03/24/10 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

27

28

___________ 2

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR FILING AMENDED THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT OF CITY, Case No. CV-08-4571 MMC 

Whereas Environmental Resolutions, Inc. has filed a Motion for Judgment on the

pleadings inter alia to the Third-Party Complaint of City of Eureka, scheduled for hearing on

April 9, 2010; 

Whereas the City of Eureka and Environmental Resources, Inc. have conferred about

said motion and the response thereto by the City of Eureka;

Whereas City of Eureka believes that in addition to the stipulation herein, a number of

issues raised by said motion can be resolved or otherwise addressed by amendment of said Third

Party Complaint; 

Whereas City of Eureka believes that the court’s ruling on said motion as to the

Complaint filed by KFD Enterprises, Inc. will provide guidance with respect to the viability of

the City of Eureka’s claims against Environmental Resources, Inc. under CERCLA and the

HSAA;

Therefore, Environmental Resolutions, Inc. and City of Eureka hereby stipulate to each

of the following:

(1) City of Eureka may have to and including April 30, 2010 to file its Third Amended

Complaint as to Environmental Resolutions, Inc.;

(2) Environmental Resolutions, Inc. may have to and including May 28, 2010 to file a

responsive pleading to said Third Amended Complaint;

(3) said Third Amended Complaint shall not add any additional claims for relief against

Environmental Resolutions, Inc.;

(4) said Third Amended Complaint shall not seek the recovery of punitive damages

against Environmental Resolutions, Inc.;

(5) said Third Amended Complaint shall not seek against Environmental Resolutions,

Inc. the recovery of the attorneys fees of the City of Eureka’s attorneys but may seek the

Case 3:08-cv-04571-SC Document 213 Filed 03/24/10 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

27

28

___________ 3

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR FILING AMENDED THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT OF CITY, Case No. CV-08-4571 MMC 

recovery of attorneys fees liability which may be imposed on the City of Eureka. 

In agreeing to this stipulation, Environmental Resolutions, Inc. does not concede that

any type of indemnity is proper, but only that the City of Eureka may seek such

indemnity in the Third Amended Complaint subject to any future legal challenges by

Environmental Resolutions, Inc.

DATED: March 16, 2010 DAVIDOVITZ & BENNETT LLP 

By: /s/ Moris Davidovitz

MORIS DAVIDOVITZ 

Attorneys for CITY OF EUREKA 

(The filer hereby attests that concurrence in the filing of this

document has been obtained from the signatory below.)

DATED: March 16, 2010 GORDON & REES LLP 

By: /s/ George A. Acero

GEORGE A. ACERO

Attorneys for Environmental Resolutions,

Inc.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: March __, 2010 __________________________________

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

24

Case 3:08-cv-04571-SC Document 213 Filed 03/24/10 Page 3 of 3