---

One of the largest wildfire liability cases in U.S. history is now under appellate review, with stakes that could reshape how utilities operate in fire-prone regions. At issue is whether PacifiCorp can be held collectively responsible for devastating Oregon wildfires that destroyed communities and lives.

The outcome could have far-reaching consequences not just for the Berkshire Hathaway-owned utility, but for the future of wildfire accountability across the Western United States.

PacifiCorp challenges sweeping wildfire rulings

PacifiCorp on Wednesday urged the Oregon Court of Appeals to overturn a series of trial court rulings that expose the utility to as much as $52 billion in potential wildfire-related liabilities.

The Portland-based utility is facing claims from thousands of Oregon residents who allege that PacifiCorp’s power lines ignited multiple wildfires during a powerful windstorm over Labor Day weekend in 2020. The company has consistently denied wrongdoing.

According to PacifiCorp, the trial court made critical legal errors that unfairly broadened its exposure and undermined due process.

Dispute centers on class action structure

At the heart of the appeal is the trial judge’s decision to allow victims from four separate wildfires—located more than 100 miles apart, to sue together in a single class action.

PacifiCorp argues that the consolidation blurred important distinctions between individual fires, circumstances, and causation. The company also objects to the inclusion of damages tied to a fifth wildfire, which investigators attributed to lightning rather than electrical equipment.

PacifiCorp’s legal team told the three-judge appellate panel that each fire involved unique facts that should have been evaluated independently.

Utility objects to emotional distress damages

The appeal also challenges the trial court’s decision to permit jurors to award noneconomic damages, including emotional distress, alongside compensation for destroyed property.

PacifiCorp contends that Oregon law does not support such awards under the circumstances of the case. Allowing emotional harm claims, the utility argues, dramatically increases potential liability beyond what is legally justified.

“This was a tragedy,” said Theodore Boutrous, an attorney representing PacifiCorp, during oral arguments. But he questioned whether the trial court’s approach offered a fair or efficient path to resolving the claims.

Victims’ lawyers defend trial rulings

Attorneys representing wildfire victims pushed back, arguing that PacifiCorp’s alleged negligence was the common thread linking all affected communities.

Nicholas Rosinia, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, told the appellate judges that the core issue was PacifiCorp’s failure to shut off power despite dangerous wind conditions. That alleged decision, he said, exposed thousands of people to the same risk.

Rosinia also emphasized that Oregon law permits noneconomic damages in cases involving severe trauma and personal harm.

Victims, he told the court, escaped advancing flames unsure whether they would survive, experiences he said justified compensation beyond property losses.

Appeals judges raise pointed questions

Members of the Salem-based appellate panel signaled concern over how broadly the trial court instructed jurors.

Judge Kristina Hellman questioned whether plaintiffs were required to separately prove causation and liability for each wildfire involved in the case.

“There are these four separate groups,” Hellman noted, suggesting that assumptions applied across the class may have overstretched legal standards.

The panel did not indicate when it would issue a ruling.

Trials continue despite appeal

While the appeal is pending, wildfire litigation against PacifiCorp is moving forward at the trial level.

So far, 119 plaintiffs have secured jury verdicts averaging approximately $5 million per person. These outcomes emerged from a series of expedited “mini-trials” that began in January 2024.

Under an accelerated court schedule, as many as 1,400 additional plaintiffs could go to trial by early 2028.

PacifiCorp has warned that escalating wildfire losses could force the utility to reconsider its operations if liabilities continue to mount.

Broader wildfire litigation pressure

The Oregon cases represent only part of PacifiCorp’s legal exposure.

The utility has already agreed to pay about $1.7 billion to resolve nearly 4,200 wildfire claims, including lawsuits brought by wineries and vineyards across the region. Those settlements are scheduled to continue through November.

As of September 30, PacifiCorp had set aside $2.85 billion to cover wildfire litigation stemming from fires that destroyed more than 2,000 structures and burned over 500,000 acres in Oregon and Northern California.

In addition, both the U.S. federal government and the state of Oregon have filed lawsuits seeking compensation for damage to natural resources.

Berkshire Hathaway connection adds scrutiny

PacifiCorp is owned by Berkshire Hathaway Energy, which acquired the utility for $5.1 billion in 2006.

Berkshire Hathaway Energy’s former chief executive, Greg Abel, assumed the role of Berkshire Hathaway CEO on January 1, succeeding Warren Buffett. Buffett remains chairman of the Omaha-based conglomerate.

The wildfire litigation has drawn investor and regulatory attention, given Berkshire’s reputation for long-term risk management and conservative financial practices.

What this means going forward

The Oregon Court of Appeals decision could redefine how wildfire liability cases are structured, particularly when multiple fires occur during a single extreme weather event.

If the trial court rulings are upheld, utilities across the West may face expanded class actions and broader damage claims tied to wildfire risk. A reversal, however, could narrow future lawsuits and require more individualized proof of causation.

For affected communities, the ruling will shape how quickly and comprehensively victims receive compensation.

A pivotal moment for wildfire accountability

As climate-driven wildfires grow more frequent and destructive, courts are increasingly asked to weigh corporate responsibility against natural forces.

PacifiCorp’s appeal places that balance squarely before Oregon’s judiciary, with billions of dollars, and the future of utility operations in fire-prone regions, hanging in the balance.

Whether the appellate court sides with the utility or wildfire survivors, the decision is likely to influence wildfire litigation nationwide for years to come.

(With inputs from Reuters.)

 

ALSO READ:  Epstein Files Release Sparks Fresh Scrutiny of Famous Names