Wildfire Lawsuits Target SoCal Edison

Los Angeles, CA filed against Southern California Edison (SCE) were filed soon after photos and videos provided by residents indicate that the Palisades and Eaton fires were caused by the Utility. However, the fires are still under investigation, including arson investigation. But SCE has said its equipment could have ignited the Hurst Fire. Attorneys expect that these initial wildfire lawsuits will be followed by thousands more legal claims.

Wildfire Lawsuits Target SoCal Edison The Los Angeles Times on January 13th reported that at least one lawyer investigating the cause, or causes, was looking at whether a downed utility line could have sparked the Palisades fire. BNN Bloomberg reported that homeowners near Eaton Canyon said flames were breaking out below Edison power lines after a power interruption on January 7th.

The New York Times reporters near Skull Rock in the hills above the Palisades–the “crime scene” as dubbed by the LAPD–suggested several possibilities for the origin of the fire. Satellite images analyzed by the NYT and witness photographs suggests the ignition point may have been at Skull Rock. And the Washington Post weighed in: Its analysis of photos, videos, satellite imagery and radio communications, as well as interviews with witnesses, indicates that the Palisades Fire started in the area where firefighters had spent hours using helicopters to knock down a blaze six days earlier.

First Eaton Fire Lawsuit

A lawsuit filed by Jeremy Gursey against Southern California Edison (SCE), claims that the company’s power lines were responsible for starting the Eaton Fire, which destroyed his home in Altadena. His lawsuit claims “SCE failed to de-energize their power lines despite high fire risk conditions, potentially causing the blaze to ignite near their transmission towers. Based upon our investigation, our discussions with various consultants, the public statements of SCE, and the video evidence of the fire’s origin, we believe that the Eaton Fire was ignited because of SCE’s failure to de-energize its overhead wires which traverse Eaton Canyon—despite a red flag PDS wind warning issued by the national weather service the day before the ignition of the fire.”

The case is Gursey v. Southern California Edison Company, 25STCV00731, California Superior Court, Los Angeles County, Central District (Los Angeles).

Another complaint filed on behalf of Altadena resident Evangeline Iglesias claims that “there is clear evidence from video footage, photographs, and witness accounts that the fire was caused by electrical equipment operated by Defendants Edison International and Southern California Edison,” reported the Associated Press (AP).

And the first of several lawsuits was brought on behalf of a group of homeowners, renters, business owners and others with properties destroyed by the deadly Eaton Fire in the Pasadena area. The complaints allege that Southern California Edison power lines were the cause of the blaze that leveled the community of Altadena. One of the residents said he walked outside that Tuesday night and approached a tower holding Edison’s power lines and found “a fire maybe knee high” had started at its base, according to the lawsuit. A resident who hikes in Eaton Canyon said he’d recently noticed the area was “full of dry debris and dead brush,” according to the complaint, which is peppered with photos and maps of the area.

The suit claims Edison didn’t properly maintain its electrical infrastructure, presenting “an inherent risk and danger of fire to private property” and that the company’s vegetation management wasn’t compliant with local rules. “Edison knew about the significant risk of wildfires caused by its aging and overloaded utility towers and power poles before the Eaton Fire began,” according to the complaint and reported by BNN Bloomberg.

Multiple lawsuits were filed on January 13th by families whose homes were destroyed. One lawsuit claims the Eaton fire was caused when SCE’s energized transmission and electrical equipment created an “electrical arcing event which sent a shower of spars and molten metal down to the ground into a receptive fuel bed.”

Edison Responds

An Edison spokesperson told AP on January 13th that it is “aware that a lawsuit has been filed, but has not yet reviewed it”. The utility has acknowledged that fire agencies are investigating whether its equipment might have started a separate, smaller LA-area fire. In early January, Edison filed a report with the California Public Utilities Commission related to the Eaton Fire, saying it has not received any suggestions that its equipment was involved in the ignition of that fire. The Utility reported that “Preliminary analysis by SCE of electrical circuit information for the energized transmission lines going through the area for 12 hours prior to the reported start time of the fire shows no interruptions or electrical or operational anomalies until more than one hour after the reported start time of the fire.”

SCE said that the authorities are investigating whether its equipment “was involved in the ignition” of one of the wildfires in Los Angeles. The utility said one of its power lines fell on Jan. 7 but that it “does not know whether the damage observed occurred before or after the start of the fire.”

On its website, Edison points the blame at “extreme winds and dangerous fires fueled by strong winds…This extreme weather event is a rapidly evolving situation.” “The Eaton Fire began Tuesday afternoon in SCE’s service area. SCE has transmission facilities on the east side of Eaton Canyon. SCE’s distribution lines immediately to the west of Eaton Canyon were de-energized well before the reported start time of the fire, as part of SCE’s Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) program.”