Summary
In County of Suffolk v Long Is. Light. Co., 710 F Supp 1487 (EDNY, 1989), affd in part, revd in part, 907 F2d 1295 (2d Cir, 1990), a class action racketeering lawsuit onbehalf of past and future ratepayers of LILCO, the plaintiff class alleged that LILCO fraudulently obtained rate increases from the Public Service Commission by making deliberate misrepresentations regarding the Shoreham Nuclear Plant. A settlement agreement was reached between the class and LILCO wherein LILCO agreed, in relevant part, to pay ratepayers $390 million.
Summary of this case from Cnty. of Suffolk v. Long Island Power Auth.Opinion
No. 87-CV-646 (JBW).
April 14, 1989.
FINAL JUDGMENT
It is finally ORDERED ADJUDGED and DECREED:
1) Suffolk's County's claims are dismissed on the merits and with prejudice as provided in this court's Memorandum and Order of February 11, 1989, as amended April 14, 1989. Suffolk County's pendent state claims are dismissed without prejudice.
2) The settlement agreement dated February 27, 1989, is approved as interpreted by this court's Memorandum and Order of March 22, 1989, as amended April 14, 1989.
3) Attorneys fees and expenses and other disposition of the $10,000,000 fund for legal expenses, are approved as provided in the Memoranda and Orders of March 22 and March 23, 1989, as amended April 14, 1989.
4) A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is granted and motions for a new trial and a conditional new trial are denied, as provided by this court's Memorandum and Order of February 11, 1989, as amended April 14, 1989.
5) Motions for certification of the following class pursuant to Rule 23(b)(1)(B):
All persons who were ratepayers of the Long Island Lighting Company at any time during the period January 1, 1974, through the present and also those who are or will be ratepayers of the Long Island Lighting Company
and for appointment of Judith P. Vladeck, Esq., as representative of the class, as provided by this court's Memoranda and Orders of February 13 and February 15, 1989, as amended April 14, 1989, are confirmed.
6) A Memorandum and Order permitting intervention dated February 13, 1989, as amended April 14, 1989, is confirmed. The United States is not a member of the class, except for purposes of sharing in the settlement.
7) Orders adding plaintiffs and permitting substitution of counsel and deciding various procedural issues are confirmed.
8) No costs or disbursements are granted to any party.
9) The court retains equitable jurisdiction to supervise the operation of this decree.
10) This judgment is stayed pending disposition of appeals.