San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority v. Aerojet General Corp

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SAN GABRIEL BASIN WATER
QUALITY AUTHORITY; SAN
GABRIEL VALLEY WATER
COMPANY; CITY OF MONTEREY
PARK; SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
WATER COMPANY,
Plaintiffs - Appellees,
v.
AEROJET GENERAL CORP,
Defendant,
and
TONKS PROPERTIES,
Defendant-counter-claimant -
Appellant,
SHELLEY LINDERMAN, as Trustee of
the Linderman Trust; M&T COMPANY;
DON TONKS; ROY TONKS,
Defendants-counter-
claimants-3rd-party-plaintiffs - Appellants,
No. 08-56589
D.C. No. 2:02-cv-04565-ABC-RC
MEMORANDUM*
FILED
JUN 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2
v.
JAMES ANDRUSS, as Trustee of the
Andruss Family Trust and JAMES
ANDRUSS as Trustee of the Survivors
Trust UDT, Dated September 22, 1987;
CARDINAL INDUSTRIAL FINISHES;
CARDCO; EEMUS MANUFACTURING
CORP.; GLORIA JEBBIA, as Trustee of
the Norf James Jebbia Testamentary Trust;
ROC-AIRE CORPORATION; BAERBEL
JANNEBERG, as Trustee of the Janneberg
Trusts formerly known as Servex, Corp.;
SMITTYBILT, INC.; SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY;
INTERNATIONAL MEDICATION
SYSTEMS, LTD.,
Third-party-defendants -
Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Audrey B. Collins, Chief District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted October 5, 2009
Pasadena, California
Before: HALL, W. FLETCHER and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
The district court entered judgment on August 20, 2008, approving the
settlement between the Water Entities and the G10 Third-Party Defendants
(appellees); dismissing all claims against the G10; and barring any claims for

-- 2 of 3 --

3
contribution, cost recovery, or indemnity against the G10 Third-Party Defendants.
Appellants are a group of non-settling defendants who objected to the settlement,
dismissal, and bar order.
In a separate published disposition filed today, USA v. Aerojet-General
Corp., No. 08-55996, we reverse and remand the district court’s denial of the non-
settling defendants’ motion to intervene in that case. In light of our opinion in that
case, we vacate and remand the district court’s decision in this case for further
proceedings consistent with that decision.
VACATED AND REMANDED.

-- 3 of 3 --