The Island County Board of Commissioners last week ended a lawsuit with homeowners living in the neighborhood affected by the 2013 Ledgewood landslide. Without admitting to any fault, the county agreed to pay $1.5 million in a settlement with residents.

While on its surface the settlement seems a bitter pill, the decision to enter into the deal was a practical one. Settling likely saved taxpayers a very costly, drawn out courtroom battle.

The fact is, the settlement with the Ledgewood property owners is but a reminder that our civil court system is far from perfect. Even if the case concluded with Island County being cleared of every claim of wrongdoing in the lawsuit, attorney fees and court costs could easily far exceed the amount of the settlement.

As with the ongoing Wonn Road beach access case, there is no guarantee of victory in either side of a lawsuit.

In the Ledgewood case, if Island County had gambled and lost in court, taxpayers likely would pay more than $1.5 million to the residents, and there would also have been a mountain of costs and fees.

Experts from the state Department of Natural Resources described the 2013 landslide as part of a much larger, 1.5-mile “landslide complex” that may date back as much as 11,000 years. Some may say that, in choosing to live in a historically recognized landslide area, Ledgewood residents made a conscious choice, one that the taxpayers shouldn’t have to foot the bill for.

We won’t argue that point.

However, the precedent has been set countless times before in courtrooms across the country. We’ve all heard about the McDonald’s customer who, in 1992, suffered third-degree burns after spilling hot coffee that she was holding between her knees. The woman was awarded $3 million by a jury.

Some may think that residents of Ledgewood should have known better, that they failed to deal with drainage issues. For every Whidbey Island resident convinced the lawsuit was a slam dunk in Island County’s favor, there are probably numerous attorneys who would warn that a tearful plaintiff testifying in court about losing their home is a powerful image for a sympathetic judge or jury, especially when facing a government agency or large corporation.

Tort reform, which would reduce damages in civil justice cases, has been touted as one solution to the problem. But tort reform creates its own heartburn for those who, while disgusted by big payouts in what they see as frivolous lawsuits, also don’t want to see government agencies and corporations let off the hook when they have committed egregious wrongs.

Either way, the Island County commissioners made a decision that they believed is in the best interest of the taxpayers and county coffers, and we cannot fault them for that.