PacifiCorp has filed an opening brief in its appeal of a class action lawsuit over the 2020 wildfires, arguing hundreds of millions of dollars in judgments are invalid due to court errors. On April 1, PacifiCorp filed a brief in the Oregon Court of Appeals with regard to James et al vs. PacifiCorp, for which damages proceedings are under way in Multnomah County Circuit Court.
The company argued the higher court should overturn a 2023 verdict finding it liable for the fires, based on alleged legal errors committed in the lower court. In the alternative, the company asked for all verdicts during damages proceedings to be vacated or for all non-economic damages. Plaintiffs have been given until May 20 to file an answering brief.
In 2023 a jury found PacifiCorp liable for negligently causing the Santiam, Echo Mountain Complex, South Obenchain and 242 fires on Labor Day 2020. So far $306 million has been awarded to 50 plaintiffs. Proceedings are ongoing to determine damages on nearly 1,600 claims.
PacifiCorp appealed the 2023 verdict Jan. 4, 2024. It raised three main concerns: the class certification process, liability standards during the 2023 trial, and the noneconomic damages.
On May 23, 2022, the James class was certified to include all individuals and entities who suffered losses within the boundaries of the four fires. At the time, PacifiCorp argued this definition was overbroad, containing thousands of individuals spread over a broad geographic area. This argument was reiterated in the April 1 brief and said plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that all class members had common losses from a common cause.
The brief also referenced a March 19 report by the Oregon Department of Forestry which concluded powerline fires did not contribute significantly to the spread of the Santiam Fire. The report has since been criticized by plaintiff attorneys who said ODF ignored key information including evidence presented to the 2023 jury. ODF has said it stands by the report.
PacifiCorp said the March 19 report is evidence the lower court erred when including Santiam Fire survivors in the class. It has asked the court to de-certify the class based on the report.
When PacifiCorp appealed class certification in July 2022, similarly arguing the definition was over-broad, appeals court administrators rejected the filing as meritless Aug. 25, 2022, saying a ruling on the issue would not impact the outcome of the case.
PacifiCorp’s second concern related to the way jurors in the 2023 trial were instructed to consider the company’s liability. The case was split into two proceedings: an initial phase to determine liability and a second phase to determine individual damages.
The 2023 liability trial focused on claims from 17 fire survivors who were representative of the class as a whole. The jury was instructed that evidence of liability to these individuals was to be considered evidence of liability to the entire class. PacifiCorp argued this approach was legally incorrect because subsequent juries have been allowed to make decisions without being shown evidence of liability to individual class members.
Lastly, PacifiCorp took issue with the high value of economic damages awarded, arguing, under applicable state law, no such damages should have been awarded.
Of the $306 million in total jury awards, $213 million have been for non-economic damages.
