Opinion ID: 577164
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Separate Evaluation

Text: 140 The Hoffer Group argues that the district court erred by not evaluating the State's contribution to the Consolidated Settlement on its own merits. It asserts the district court instead improperly evaluated the Consolidated Settlement as a whole and determined comprehensively whether it was fair, adequate, and reasonable, when under the terms of Consolidated Settlement, the State's contribution was severable on its face. 141 Our review of the district court's order and judgment convinces us that the court separately considered the fairness, adequacy, and reasonableness of the State's contribution. See In re Washington Public Power, 720 F.Supp. at 1417 ([T]he Court finds the terms of the Consolidated Settlement Agreement that apply to the State to be fair and reasonable to Class Plaintiffs in accordance with the mandate of Fed.R.Civ.P. 23. (emphasis added). 15 It therefore is immaterial whether the district court assumed that the State's contribution was not severable from the body of the Consolidated Settlement; because the district court separately evaluated the State's contribution, its conclusion that the State's contribution was fair, adequate, and reasonable was not dependent on this allegedly mistaken assumption. 142