Sierra Pacific Industries, Fraud on the Court, California 2014

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — United States District Judge William B. Shubb issued a detailed, 63-page order today denying Sierra Pacific Industries’ motion to set aside the settlement of the Moonlight Fire case and emphatically rejecting each and every allegation by Sierra Pacific’s counsel that there was fraud on the court.

According to the order, Sierra Pacific Industries claimed that there was fraud on the court in the settlement of the Moonlight Fire case, but Judge Shubb concluded that the defendants ‘have failed to identify even a single instance of fraud on the court, certainly none on the part of any attorney for the government.’

The Moonlight Fire ignited on September 3, 2007, on private forest land in Plumas County, California, and raged for more than two weeks, consuming about 65,000 acres of land, including more than 46,000 acres of federal public lands. A jury trial in the case before U.S. District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller had been scheduled to begin on July 9, 2012 in Sacramento, but the parties entered into a settlement shortly before trial. At an estimated value of at least $122,500,000, the settlement was the largest recovery ever received by the United States for damages caused by a forest fire.

In rejecting each and every claim by Sierra Pacific’s attorneys, Judge Shubb noted that they were aware of almost all of the facts, which they now claim show fraud-on-the-court before they decided to settle the case. As the Court put it, ‘defendants made the calculated decision on the eve of trial to settle the case knowing everything that they now claim amounts to fraud on the court.’

As to arguments that an Assistant U.S. Attorney facilitated perjury by an investigator in a deposition when he testified about what the defendants characterized as a ‘white flag’ near the origin location, the Judge ruled that ‘[w]hen the record is examined there is no substance whatsoever to defendants’ contention.’

‘I have repeatedly stated that a full examination of the actual record in this case would demonstrate that the misconduct claims made by the attorneys for Sierra Pacific were bogus, and I am very gratified by the Court’s thorough and thoughtful ruling,’ said United States Attorney Benjamin B. Wagner. ‘Sierra Pacific’s reckless accusations have been broadcast in open court and in numerous media stories throughout the country. It is not an inconsequential thing to besmirch the integrity of dedicated public servants.’

The defendant, Sierra Pacific Industries, is a California-based company. The estimated value of the settlement is at least $122,500,000.

Sierra Pacific Industries, the defendant in this case, has failed to identify any instance of fraud on the court. The settlement was for damages caused by a forest fire that consumed about 65,000 acres of land in Plumas County, California.

Related Federal Cases