Wildfires Mass Tort Marketing Campaigns for Lawyers

Southern California Edison announced details of its compensation program for victims of the Eaton wildfire in January, which killed 19 people and burned more than 14,000 acres of Los Angeles County.

 
The company called it a voluntary, comprehensive claims program designed to provide direct payments and fast resolutions to eligible individuals and businesses impacted by the fire.

 
Under the program, which is expected to begin payouts in early 2026, homeowners who lost single-family residences can receive $550–$750 per square foot, amounting to about $900,000 for a 1,500-square-foot home. Those who agree to settle directly with Edison, avoiding mediation or litigation, can get an additional $200,000, plus $100,000 for each adult and $50,000 for each child to cover pain and suffering. Claims could be processed within 60 days and paid within 30 days of acceptance.

 
Though it is aimed at expediting payments, victims may be able to recover more compensation through litigation, which many are expected to pursue.
A group representing thousands of people from Altadena and the surrounding areas expressed their objections to the Edison plan, saying that the maps Edison uses to determine eligibility exclude some impacted residents from the program. They add that the compensation offered falls short in various ways, including an incorrect assumption that residents will receive the full value of their property insurance policies.

 
The United States Justice Department has filed two lawsuits against Southern California Edison Co., alleging the company’s negligence caused the Eaton and Fairview fires.

The United States Justice Department filed two lawsuits against Southern California Edison Co., alleging the company’s negligence caused the Eaton and Fairview fires.

 
Acting U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli announced the legal action that seeks over $77 million in damages. He accused SoCal Edison of what he called a troubling pattern of negligence that led to the destruction of tens of thousands of acres of National Forest System lands. In the Eaton Fire lawsuit, Essayli alleges SoCal Edison negligently failed to properly maintain its power and transmission lines in the area where the fire ignited, and added that similar maintenance failures led to the Fairview fire.

 
It was reported that attorneys representing the dozens of plaintiffs in state court lawsuits over the Eaton fire said the federal lawsuits could bolster their own cases. Several other lawsuits have been filed against SoCal Edison, including by LA County and the city of Pasadena.

Victims of the LA wildfires are suing the California FAIR Plan, the state-backed insurer of last resort. They claim that FAIR did not adequately compensate them for smoke and toxic residue damage to their homes caused by the fires despite clear evidence of contamination.

The lawsuit, which involves over 100 plaintiffs, contends that the insurer
deliberately uses vague and potentially unlawful language to deny legitimate smoke damage claims, often without conducting adequate inspections or testing.

In June, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruled that the FAIR Plan is violating state law by how it treats smoke damage claims and interprets “direct physical loss”. The judge said the plan’s smoke damage policy is illegal because it provides less coverage than what is required by California law.

The state’s Department of Insurance has declared parts of FAIR’s policy language unenforceable, calling on the insurer to revise its policies and handle smoke damage claims fairly. The department filed an Order to Show Cause against the FAIR Plan after consumer complaints showed a pattern of denying smoke damage claims based on an arbitrary FAIR Plan-defined requirement for “permanent physical damage.”

Victims of the Jan. 7 Palisades wildfire filed an amended complaint alleging that the city of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) should have been better prepared to fight the catastrophic blaze.

The case, Grigsby, et al. vs. City of Los Angeles, involves about 3,300 plaintiffs. They cite new information showing that LADWP neglected to inspect a 117-million-gallon reservoir in the Pacific Palisades between 2021 and 2023. As a result, the city had to drain the reservoir in 2024 due to a tear in its cover.

With the reservoir still empty, the lawsuit states that firefighters had to obtain water from outside the fire zone to combat the wildfire and were delayed by six hours, by which time the fire covered nearly 1,500 acres in the area. The attorney representing the plaintiffs alleged that LADWP attempted to revise its inspection policy retroactively, from once per year to once per three years. The lawsuit accuses LADWP, the city of Los Angeles, and the state of California of negligent and wrongful conduct.

A group of California homeowners who lost their homes in the Los Angeles wildfires filed suit against two of the nation’s largest homeowner’s insurance companies, United Services Automobile Association (USAA) and the American Automobile Association (AAA). The homeowners allege they were underinsured and that the payouts offered by the companies fall far short of fairly compensating them for the losses they have suffered.

The lawsuits, filed in California Superior Court, allege widespread fraud, negligence, and bad faith. They accused the companies of “systematically underinsuring thousands of homeowners despite years of advertising their expertise in estimating rebuilding costs and assuring policyholders they would be fully protected in the event of a total loss.”

Two lawsuits were filed in May against Southern California Edison in Los Angeles County Superior Court. One, a proposed class-action suit, was filed by Amber Diaz on behalf of her minor child. It alleges that negligence on the part of SoCal Edison sparked the Eaton fire and exposed residents to hazardous toxins such as lead and asbestos. The plaintiff claims fallout from the fire, smoke and ash contaminated homes with neurotoxic materials.

SoCal Edison is accused of negligence, trespass, and public and private nuisance, and seeks punitive damages, medical monitoring costs, and property remediation. The lawsuit alleges the utility has a history of safety failures and cites the risks, particularly to children, of what it calls an environmental catastrophe.

The second lawsuit against SoCal Edison alleges that children living near the Eaton Fire were exposed to dangerous levels of lead and asbestos released by smoke from the blaze. The complaint said the utility’s equipment may have caused the wildfire that spread toxic debris in Altadena, Pasadena, and South Pasadena.  The lawsuit cites independent environmental tests indicating significant contamination in local homes. Plaintiffs seek compensation for ongoing medical monitoring of affected children.

Ten victims of the Eaton and Palisades fires are plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed April 10 in Los Angeles County Superior Court against California’s FAIR Plan, the state-backed insurer of last resort.   It is reported to be the first mass tort case against the plan in the aftermath of the January wildfires.

The lawsuit accuses the plan of systematically denying and underpaying smoke damage claims related to the fires. The suit alleges homes were rendered uninhabitable by invisible toxic chemical residue from heavy smoke, including hazardous substances such as lead and arsenic.

The FAIR Plan is accused of insurance bad faith and breach of contract through its refusal to properly investigate and pay for the cleanups as required by state law.  The lawsuit targets not only the FAIR Plan, but also major insurers who fund the plan, including Nationwide, State Farm and, Allstate.

Los Angeles County is suing Edison over the Eaton Fire, as it aims to recover hundreds of millions spent on emergency response and repairs. Pasadena and Sierra Madre have filed similar suits. While Edison admits its transmission line may have played a role, it insists it acted responsibly. Still, California law allows utilities to be held liable for wildfire damage even if they weren’t negligent.

A lawsuit filed late March accuses the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power of negligence in the Palisades Fire, which killed 12 people and destroyed thousands of properties. Plaintiffs allege LADWP failed to maintain power lines and left key water reservoirs empty, worsening the fire’s impact. They claim LADWP initially denied, then admitted, that live wires from a broken pole sparked the blaze. The suit seeks damages for property loss, injuries, and economic harm.

Dozens of lawsuits have been filed against Southern California Edison (SCE), alleging that the company’s negligence sparked the Eaton Fire. Video evidence appears to show sparks flying from aging power lines and poorly maintained equipment just before the fire ignited. Plaintiffs include homeowners, business owners, and individuals who suffered severe injuries or lost loved ones.

Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) has secured a $10 million legal defense agreement with Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP to fight lawsuits stemming from the Palisades Fire. The firm has a history of defending major utilities in wildfire cases, including PG&E and Hawaiian Electric.

On February 21, tenant advocates filed a lawsuit against six Los Angeles landlords for illegally raising rents after two of California’s most destructive wildfires. The lawsuit argues that rent hikes of up to 50% violated California’s emergency pricing laws, which cap increases at 10% during a state-declared emergency.

By the end of the month, evidence was uncovered, by a private investigator, of electrical arcing on an inactive transmission tower, minutes before SCE reported a fault on a distant power line. This discovery puts the fire’s origins and the SCE’s role in the disaster under scrutiny.

Years of litigation are anticipated as at least 31 wildfires have devastated Los Angeles and surrounding regions in the first week of January. Many factors, including long-standing drought, low humidity, and the hurricane-like Santa Ana winds, are believed to have escalated the fires. The Palisdades Fire and the Eaton Fire have been the most devastating, consuming nearly 24,000 and 14,000 acres, respectively. At least 27 people have died, and entire neighborhoods, schools, and businesses have been burnt down, displacing whole communities. According to J.P. Morgan analysts, the wildfires, still ongoing at this time of writing, is likely to result in more than $20 billion in insured losses alone.

Recent findings from retired arson investigators indicate transmission tower markings consistent with electrical arcing at the scene, challenging earlier claims that the fire was caused by homeless encampments or fireworks.

At the time of this writing, a judge has directed Edison International to disclose circuit data from the Eaton Fire’s origin and preserve equipment from the area. The fire, which killed 17, has sparked lawsuits alleging negligence, with residents blaming inadequate maintenance and the decision to maintain power during extreme winds.

Wyoming’s Joint Minerals Committee reviewed a proposed bill offering liability protection to public utilities in wildfire-related lawsuits. The measure required utilities to develop wildfire mitigation plans to qualify for protection, aiming to lower litigation and insurance costs. While utility companies backed the bill, the committee set it aside, requesting revisions before revisiting the proposal in the next legislative session.

Wildfire litigation saw major developments:

A $4 billion global settlement resolved claims tied to the 2023 Maui wildfires. A Maui judge mandated insurance companies disclose wildfire-related claims by December 2, increasing transparency.

In Oregon, six wineries sued PacifiCorp for over $4 million, alleging its negligence during the 2020 Labor Day fires caused severe vineyard damage.

Meanwhile, Wyoming’s governor sought emergency funding to address costs from the state’s worst fire season in decades, which burned 850,000 acres and depleted the fire control budget.

October 31, 2024

The Hawaii Attorney General’s office announced the conclusion of its Lahaina wildfire investigation, deciding against criminal charges. The report exposed major lapses in communication and preparedness that obstructed evacuation efforts. It also praised Maui’s first responders for their bravery during the disaster. A third phase of the inquiry will explore strategies to prevent similar tragedies moving forward.