Center for Environmental Health v. Wheeler
- Saundra Armstrong
- 4:18-cv-03197
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 8
In Center for Environmental Health v. Regan, Judge Armstrong approved a settlement requiring federal defendants to pay plaintiffs $385,000 in fees and costs.
The three plaintiff environmental organizations and the federal defendants are affected. The agreement requires the federal defendants to pay $385,000 and releases the plaintiffs’ related claims for attorneys’ fees and costs.
What happened
Center for Environmental Health v. Regan involved environmental groups’ claims that federal agencies failed to meet duties concerning malathion and the Endangered Species Act. The parties previously settled the claims about completing the required biological opinion and other agency duties.
The only remaining claims concerned the plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses. The plaintiffs and federal defendants agreed that the defendants would pay $385,000 to settle those claims, and that the plaintiffs would release their related fee and cost claims.
Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong approved the settlement and ordered every term of the agreement. The agreement also asked the court to keep authority to oversee compliance with the payment terms.
The detailed version
- Center for Environmental Health v. Wheeler · No. 4:18-cv-03197
- Saundra Armstrong
- Aug. 30, 2022
Background
The plaintiffs were Center for Environmental Health, Center for Biological Diversity, and Californians for Pesticide Reform. The defendants included Michael S. Regan, in his official capacity as Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Debra Haaland, in her official capacity as Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior. CropLife America was an intervenor-defendant.
The plaintiffs’ complaint concerned federal agencies’ duties under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act in connection with a consultation about malathion and two other active ingredients. The plaintiffs alleged that the agencies failed to complete required consultation work, unlawfully delayed or withheld required actions, and violated Section 7(d) by making an irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources.
Earlier Settlements
The parties first entered a partial settlement concerning the agencies’ procedural duties to complete a final biological opinion. The court entered that agreement on January 4, 2022. The Fish and Wildlife Service then issued the final biological opinion on February 28, 2022, and the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would implement the opinion’s terms on March 8, 2022.
The parties later reached a second partial settlement concerning the remaining claims against the Environmental Protection Agency defendants. The court entered that agreement on April 13, 2022. According to the fee agreement, the fee and cost claims were the only claims remaining in the case.
Fee Settlement
The plaintiffs and federal defendants agreed to settle all claims for attorneys’ fees, litigation costs, and expenses incurred in the lawsuit, including expenses related to pursuing those fee claims. Under the agreement, the federal defendants must pay $385,000, and the plaintiffs must accept that amount as full satisfaction of their fee and cost claims through the date of the agreement.
The agreement provides that the payment will be processed through the Department of the Treasury’s Judgment Fund Office. It also requires the plaintiffs to provide payment information and states that the parties ask the court to retain jurisdiction to oversee compliance with the agreement. The agreement does not admit wrongdoing, liability, or any issue of fact or law concerning the settled claims.
Court’s Order
On August 30, 2022, Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong approved and ordered each term of the Stipulation and Final Settlement Agreement for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. The order did not decide the underlying Endangered Species Act allegations on their merits; it approved the parties’ settlement of the remaining fee and cost claims.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.