Opinion ID: 175352
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The 2001 Settlement of the Site A Litigation

Text: A mediated settlement of the Site A litigation was reached in November 2000, and approved by the district court in February 2001 in an order granting a “Motion for Approval of Settlement and Determination of Good Faith,” which was filed by Emeryville, and joined by Sherwin-Williams. In the order approving the 2001 Settlement, the district court found that the Settling Defendants2 were entitled to “such protection as is provided in” § 113(f) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9613(f), and the California good faith settlement statute, Cal. Code Civ. P. §§ 877 and 877.6, as well as an order “dismissing the cross-claims asserted in the [Site A litigation], and barring contribution or equitable indemnity claims.” Under the terms of the 2001 Settlement, Sherwin-Williams agreed to pay Emeryville a lump sum of $6.5 million, and agreed to share 2 In addition to Sherwin-Williams, the Settling Defendants included the so-called Baker Hughes and Sepulveda parties to the 2001 Site A litigation. CITY OF EMERYVILLE v. SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 14143 future costs of ongoing response actions “arising from groundwater at, on, under, or emanating from” Site A.3 In return for remediation cost-sharing, the parties to the 2001 Settlement released one another “from any and all claims, demands, actions, and causes of action arising from or related to [Site A], including without limitation, claims arising from the release(s) of hazardous substances and/or contaminants at, on, under or emanating from [Site A], whether presently known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected,” and waived the protections of California Civil Code section 1542. The parties specifically agreed that “[t]he releases provided herein shall not extend to any party or entity other than Emeryville, Sherwin-Williams, [and the other Settling Defendants].” The district court retained jurisdiction to enforce the 2001 Settlement. The parties further agreed that the “prevailing party” in such a dispute would be entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees and other costs.