Oregon Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Billion-Dollar PacifiCorp Wildfire Lawsuit

Oregon Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Billion-Dollar PacifiCorp Wildfire Lawsuit

by

The Supreme Court Weighs PacifiCorp’s Billions at Stake

Dozens of wildfire survivors filled the state Supreme Court chamber in Salem this Tuesday. They were there to watch the latest chapter in a legal battle that pits thousands of wildfire survivors against PacifiCorp, the electrical utility giant owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway. At the center of the dispute is a single line of jury instructions from the original 2023 trial, a phrase that could determine whether more than $1 billion in damages remains intact or whether the entire class-action judgment is unraveled.

As reported by Oregon Public Broadcasting, the court is currently reviewing an earlier decision by the Oregon Court of Appeals that reversed a 2023 verdict. In that original trial, jurors found PacifiCorp grossly negligent for failing to cut power to its lines during the Labor Day weekend windstorms that sparked four distinct, devastating fires across Santiam Canyon, Chiloquin, Lincoln City, and Eagle Point. The outcome of this appeal will dictate the fate of about 2,000 additional claims and the compensation already awarded to roughly 200 survivors.

Jury Instructions Regarding Class Members Drive Legal Arguments

The core of the argument before the justices hinges on whether the trial court misled the jury with the instruction: “You may assume that the evidence at trial applies to all class members.” PacifiCorp’s attorney, Theodore Boutrous, argued on Tuesday that this instruction essentially invited jurors to blur the lines between four geographically distinct wildfire events.

Oregon: PacifiCorp wildfire liability argued at Supreme Court

Opposing counsel Nicholas Rosinia pushed back against that characterization. He maintained that the instructions did not tell jurors to treat proof for one fire as proof for all four wildfires. Rosinia characterized PacifiCorp’s current challenge as a late-stage attempt to dismantle a verdict they simply lost on the merits.

Skepticism from the Bench

The Supreme Court justices appeared wary of the argument that the jury was fundamentally confused. They noted the instructions included separate questions for each wildfire, and the jury filled out separate verdict forms for each wildfire. During the proceedings, Justice Stephen Bushong pointedly asked Boutrous if PacifiCorp had ever objected to the assumption of evidence application during the original trial, to which Boutrous conceded they had not, citing the court’s own instructions as the reason. Even more pointed was the inquiry from Justice Bronson James, who noted that the specific sentence now under fire was actually modified at the request of PacifiCorp’s own legal team during the original proceedings.

“How does it not have some bearing that the sentence that you’re now objecting to is the sentence as modified by your own request?” Justice Bronson James asked during the hearing.

This line of questioning suggests the court is grappling with whether PacifiCorp is raising a legitimate procedural error or attempting to relitigate the entire class-action certification after the fact. Justice James questioned whether the utility’s true grievance was the instruction itself or the fundamental decision to allow a class-action lawsuit for four separate fires in the first place.

The Human and Economic Stakes

For the survivors, the stakes extend far beyond the courtroom’s legal theory. The 2020 Labor Day weekend fires destroyed more than 3,000 buildings and claimed 11 lives. For the families who have been waiting six years for resolution, the pause on damages trials represents a prolonged period of financial and emotional uncertainty. According to attorneys on both sides of the case, it became the first class-action lawsuit against a power utility over wildfire damages.

Oregon Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Billion-Dollar PacifiCorp Wildfire Lawsuit
Photo: oregoncapitalchronicle.com

PacifiCorp’s position remains firm: they argue that the class-action structure itself was improper for four disparate fires and that the jury instructions only compounded that error. However, with the court expected to issue a written decision in the coming months, thousands of Oregonians remain in a state of suspended animation, waiting to see if the billion-dollar judgment will stand or if they will be forced back into a lengthy, individualized litigation process.

The question that remains unanswered is whether the legal system will uphold the accountability established by the jury or if the procedural complexity of class-action law will provide the utility with a path to vacate the damages. Until the justices release their opinion, the recovery process for those thousands of residents remains tethered to the outcome of this high-stakes appellate review.

More on Supreme Court

Washington Supreme Court Race Sees Ad Spending Clash Over Tech Rules · Colorado Supreme Court Rules Amendment 87 to Remain on November Ballot · Idaho Supreme Court Hears Lori Vallow Daybell Appeal Over Convictions

Worth a look

Read next