Laserfiche WebLink
I settlement by an attorney on behalf of the State will not survive <br /> 2 scrutiny if it improperly limits the powers of another state <br /> 3 agency without that agency' s knowledge or consent . Hy-Loud <br /> 4 at 747, 752 . This , however, is not .such a case. <br /> 5 In Hy- Lond, the Napa County District Attorney brought an <br /> 6 action for unfair competition and false and misleading statements <br /> 7 in violation of the H&S Code and the Business & Professions Code <br /> 8 against the operator of 18 skilled nursing facilities in 12 <br /> 9 counties in California and 2 facilities in Washington. The <br /> 1,0 parties negotiated, and the court entered, a stipulated judgment <br /> 11 pursuant to which the defendant was required to pay a fine for 16 <br /> 12 of 87 charged violations and to operate its facilities in a <br /> 13 lawful manner. In exchange, the defendant received absolution <br /> 14 for all of its violations in the 12 California counties, immunity <br /> 15 for future actions of unfair competition, and restrictions on the <br /> 16 types of enforcement proceeding which could be brought . <br /> 17 The court decided that the District Attorney lacked the <br /> 18 authority to settle on the foregoing terms because the settlement <br /> 19 limited the statutory powers and duties of the Department of <br /> 20 health Services and the 11 other counties . By law the Department <br /> 21 is responsible for controlling the operation and licensing of <br /> 22 skilled nursing facilities , and by law the other counties are <br /> 23 responsible for regulating the conduct of businesses in their <br /> 24 jurisdictions . The settlement was improper because it purported <br /> 25 to prevent the Department from bringing proceedings for <br /> 26 suspension or revocation of the license of any of the defendant ' s <br /> 27 facilities and to prevent the other counties from bringing <br /> 28 actions under the Business & Professions Code . <br /> 9 <br />