The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, et al v. Killinger et al
Filing
90
ORDER ON MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF REASONABLENESS 87 Stipulated Motion for a reasonableness determination and entry of a final judgment, by Judge Marsha J. Pechman.(MD)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
8
9
10
11
THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION, as RECEIVER of
WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK,
12
Plaintiff,
ORDER ON MOTION FOR
DETERMINATION OF
REASONABLENESS
v.
13
14
CASE NO. C11-459 MJP
KERRY K. KILLINGER, et al.,
Defendants.
15
16
17
This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ stipulated motion for a reasonableness
18 determination and entry of a final judgment. (Dkt. No. 87.) Having reviewed the motion and all
19 supporting documents, the Court finds that it cannot rule on the motion without further
20 information and briefing. The Court therefore RESERVES RULING on the motion pending
21 further briefing.
22
In order to determine whether the Settlement Agreement reached by the parties is
23 reasonable, the Court must review the following factors:
24
\\
ORDER ON MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF
REASONABLENESS- 1
1
2
3
[T]he releasing person’s damages; the merits of the releasing person’s liability theory; the
merits of the released person’s defense theory; the released person’s relative faults; the
risks and expenses of continued litigation; the released person’s ability to pay; any
evidence of bad faith, collusion, or fraud; the extent of the releasing person’s
investigation and preparation of the case; and the interests of the parties not being
released.
4
5 Glover v. Tacoma Gen. Hosp., 98 Wn.2d 708, 717 (1983).
6
The materials the parties have provided are inadequate for the Court to provide any
7 meaningful or substantive review of these factors. In particular, the parties provided no
8 information as to the Plaintiff’s damages, the Defendants’ relative faults, and the Defendants’
9 ability to pay. The Court is also not persuaded that the declaration of Layn Phillips is alone
10 sufficient to show the reasonableness of the settlement. It is without facts and analysis of the
11 factors to be considered, including but not limited to Defendants’ assets and ability to pay. Mr.
12 Phillips is a mediator paid to bring the parties to a settlement, not to measure the objective
13 reasonableness of any agreement reached. As such, his opinion does not substitute this Court’s
14 independent analysis of the Glover factors.
15
The Court will consider a renewed motion that addresses the full spectrum of factors the
16 Court is to consider with substantive declarations and documents supporting the parties’
17 positions. Any renewed motion must be filed within 15 days of entry of this order.
18
The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel.
19
Dated this 11th day of April, 2012.
20
A
21
22
Marsha J. Pechman
United States District Judge
23
24
ORDER ON MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF
REASONABLENESS- 2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?