Spring has been a busy season for parties in James et al vs. PacifiCorp, with verdict challenges pending but no further trials yet on the docket.
Phase I of the case last year resulted in PacifiCorp being found liable for the Santiam, South Obenchain, Echo Mountain Complex and 242 fires in 2020. Phase II is under way to determine damages to a class of roughly 5,000 fire survivors.
Below are summaries of major decisions and filings in the case, current as of press time April 24.
$84.2 million verdict upheld
On March 25, Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge Steffan Alexander denied a request by PacifiCorp to throw out the $84.2 million awarded in the first Phase II damages trial.
PacifiCorp had argued the Jan. 23 decision was not supported by the evidence or the law, and that Multnomah County did not have jurisdiction as an appeal of Phase I was pending.
Alexander sided with plaintiffs, who argued that the Oregon Court of Appeals allowed the case to proceed when it denied a motion to stay proceedings pending the appeal. Plaintiffs also argued that evidence of PacifiCorp’s negligence was clear and the jury’s decision was valid.
$42.4 million verdict challenged
On March 29, PacifiCorp filed a motion challenging a $42.4 million verdict rendered March 5 in the second Phase II trial.
The company again claimed the jury’s decision was faulty and not supported by the evidence or the law and should be vacated, or that Alexander should issue a correct ruling in its place
On April 14, plaintiffs filed in opposition, saying PacifiCorp was making “the same anti-accountability arguments” as before and Alexander “should again reject” the company’s reasoning.
As of press time no hearing dates were set to argue this matter.
Judge scrutinizes juror contacts
On April 5, Alexander ordered PacifiCorp to produce its summaries of post-proceedings interviews with six jurors so he may determine if correction sanctions are required.
PacifiCorp admitted in a March 18 court filing to contacting jurors after the three trials in the case to learn their impressions of the company’s defense strategies. Plaintiffs had filed a request for sanctions three days before, claiming these juror contacts violated state laws and may have provided PacifiCorp an unfair advantage.
On April 5, Alexander did not indicate his position on sanctions. He did call attention to the fact that one of the consulting firms which interviewed jurors, Dubin Research & Consulting, is owned by PacifiCorp attorney Josh Dubin.
Timber companies settle
On April 15, lawsuits by Freres Engineered Wood and C.W. Specialty Lumber were dismissed after parties reached out-of-court settlements for undisclosed amounts.
The two companies sued PacifiCorp separately in 2022. Their suits were later consolidated with the James case.
Freres was seeking $15.7 million in damages for the destruction of 7,000 acres of timberland, work stoppages at its mills and the displacement of many of its 450 employees.
C.W. was seeking $22.6 million for the destruction of its mill in Mill City where it employed 24 people, as well as 30 acres of timberland. The company closed as a result of these losses.
Lawsuit limits undecided
On April 9 the Oregon Public Utility Commission (PUC) was expected to rule on whether or not PacifiCorp could change its customer terms and conditions to significantly limit future lawsuits.
Parties in the James case have said the proposed changes could impact pending litigation such as their suit depending on how PacifiCorp applied the proposed rules.
A PUC spokesperson told Our Town the April 9 deadline, which had been set by an administrative law judge, was not binding on the commission. He said PUC was “finalizing” its decision and would “issue it soon.”
As of press time, PUC had yet to publish any decision.
