SOGGY SIMI SEEPAGE SUIT IS SETTLED OUT OF COURT.

Byline: Lisa Mascaro Daily News Staff Writer

One of the first lawsuits to come from a seeping groundwater problem in Simi Valley, which has been watched widely by neighbors sharing similar soggy conditions, was settled out of court before today's scheduled trial.

The three sides - the plaintiff, who had just moved into the neighborhood, and two sets of defendants, the husband and wife who sold the home and the real estate agent and broker involved - reached an undisclosed settlement Thursday in the suit, which had called for rescinding the purchase agreement and punitive damages against the defendants.

``I think that the condition that exists out there is unfortunate,'' said attorney Keith Millhouse, who represents the sellers, Howard and Elizabeth Dulberg. ``I don't think you have any real winners in any of this.''

In the case filed in Simi Valley Superior Court in June 1997, plaintiff Caryn Pomerantz claimed the defendants committed fraud by failing to inform her of the groundwater problem in the area before she purchased the home.

She wanted her money back on the property and called for punitive action against the defendants in a case watched by neighbors, where residents now face a possible special city tax on their homes to fix the problem.

The plaintiff and her attorney, John M. Williamson, did not return phone calls seeking comment.

``Everyone felt passionate about their positions,'' Millhouse said. ``Fortunately, we were able to resolve it to the satisfaction of everyone involved.''

The groundwater problem has been a longstanding one in neighborhoods throughout the west side of the city, where gutters fill with water, algae grows on sidewalks as water once pulled out for agriculture now accumulates underground and percolates to the surface.

According to the suit, the plaintiff entered an agreement to purchase the home from the Dulbergs in December 1995 and moved in March 1996.

The suit was filed just over a year later, about the time the issue started becoming a concern for city officials receiving neighborhood complaints about the problem.

According to the lawsuit, ``the defendants certified that there were no flooding, drainage or grading problems.'' The plaintiff now owns ``property with a flooding problem that can't be fixed by (plaintiff) and which significantly reduces the property's value,'' Williamson wrote.

Millhouse said his clients had long maintained that they were unaware of the groundwater problem during the eight years they lived at the Caballero Street home before relocating to Tennessee.

The Dulbergs filed a counter-claim against the real estate agents and broker at Century 21 Hilltop Realtors, claiming it was their responsibility to disclose any known problems. The real estate firm filed another counter-claim, against the Dulbergs.

Mark Miller, an attorney for the real estate agents and broker at Century 21 Hilltop Realtors, did not return phone calls seeking comment.

However, in court documents regarding the initial claims from the plaintiff, Miller contended that the real estate agents and broker acted in accordance with state law governing their profession, and made available as much information as they had compiled on the property.

The terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

The water problem in the neighborhood has become an increasingly pressing issue following a city report this summer that suggested taxing residents up to $20,000 over 20 years to pay for a solution.

Typically, the city has handled the rising groundwater in other neighborhoods around the west end of town by installing extensive pumping operations to pull the water out of the ground and flush it down the Arroyo Simi.

However, looking for alternatives, city engineers developed plans for an underground diversion system that would cost $3.6 million to install but they say would be cheaper to operate than the costly pumps.

But resident balkTed at having the lien put on their homes, saying the city has long known about the problem, fixed it in other neighborhoods and should not ask residents to pay for the solution.