California
Appeals

Standard of Review-whether a settlement is in "good faith abuse of discretion-abuse of discretion

A.  Standard of Review

            The trial court is given broad discretion in deciding whether a settlement is in "good faith" for purposes of section 877.6, and its decision may be reversed only upon a showing of abuse of discretion.  (Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde & Associates (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488, 502 (Tech-Bilt).)  However, where the exercise of discretion on the basis of established criteria may yield but one conclusion, an abuse of discretion may be found and the appellate court may determine that a particular settlement lacks good faith within the meaning of the statute.  (Ibid.) . . .

            We are mindful that one goal of section 877.6 is to encourage pretrial settlements.  (Tech-Bilt, supra, 38 Cal.3d at p. 498.)  However, the equitable policy behind section 877.6 is to encourage "settlement among all interested parties."  (West, supra, 27 Cal.App.4th at p. 1636, italics added.)  That goal is not furthered when Geocon's proportionate share of liability with the other defendants is not considered.  The court's failure to consider this factor constituted an abuse of discretion.  (Tech-Bilt, supra, 38 Cal.3d at p. 502.)

DISPOSITION

            Let a peremptory writ of mandate issue directing the superior court to vacate its September 1, 2006 order finding the settlement agreement between Sunbow and Geocon to be in good faith.  Petitioners shall recover their costs on appeal.  The stay issued by this court on November 8, 2006, is vacated.

TSI Seismic etc. v. Super. Ct. 4/2/07 CA4/1
TSI Seismic etc. v. Super. Ct. 4/2/07 CA4/1