In Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. ExxonMobil Corp. (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 675, an organization known as Communities for a Better Environment sued ExxonMobil under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Act) (Health & Saf. Code, 25249.5-25249.13), alleging ExxonMobil had contaminated sources of drinking water by leaking toluene and benzene. That action settled, resulting in an agreement releasing " 'any and all ... claims that could have been asserted in this action arising out of any alleged discharge or release of benzene and/or toluene.' " (Consumer Advocacy Group, at p. 688.) In a separate suit, another organization, Consumer Advocacy Group (CAG), alleged that ExxonMobil had violated the Act by contaminating drinking water sources with toluene, benzene, and lead. ExxonMobil moved for summary judgment in the CAG suit, invoking the doctrine of res judicata based on the prior settlement. The trial court granted the motion. The Court of Appeal reversed, stating: "CAG distinguishes the primary right at issue by pointing out that its complaint alleged violations based on benzene, toluene, and lead, while the complaint and settlement in the other action concerned benzene and toluene, but not lead. ExxonMobil responds by asserting that the primary right at issue is the leaking of petroleum products into water sources, rather than the leaking of any particular gasoline constituent. But the settlement is specific in covering only benzene and toluene; it does not contain language permitting a broader application. ... "ExxonMobil argues, 'The Settlement Agreement in the other Action specifically encompasses the release of all gasoline constituents, which includes lead.' ... The general language of the agreement does not specifically encompass 'all gasoline constituents.' ... "... We are not holding that a single settlement agreement cannot resolve claims relating to all gasoline constituents. Instead, we conclude that this settlement does not do so. "While ExxonMobil is not entitled to a ruling that CAG's entire action is barred by res judicata, this is only because the other suit did not resolve claims relating to lead." (Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. ExxonMobil Corp., supra, 168 Cal.App.4th at pp. 688-689.)