Civil Litigation,
Government
Dec. 17, 2019
CPUC won’t opine on wildfire inverse condemnation doctrine
State utility regulators in so many words, declined to offer its viewpoints on strict liability doctrine of inverse condemnation in their Woolsey Fire amicus brief and instead discussed its own rate-setting procedures.
Southern California Edison Co., facing claims from the Woolsey Fire, will have to find support elsewhere in its quest to challenge a stringent liability doctrine as state regulators refused to entertain the concept in an amicus brief.
The cause of the Woolsey Fire -- which began Nov. 8, 2018 near the Santa Susana Field Laboratory in Simi Valley then burned through more than 96,000 acres in Los Angeles and Ventura counties -- has no...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In
Enewsletter Sign-up
Related Content
Civil Litigation
Inverse liability wildfire claims threaten Edison’s financial base
By Gina Kim
Environmental & Energy, Civil Litigation
Judge won’t immediately throw out inverse liability against SoCal Edison in Woolsey Fire
By Gina Kim
Government, Civil Litigation
Woolsey Fire plaintiffs say state has stalled investigation report
By Gina Kim
California Courts of Appeal
Quinn Emanuel disqualified from wildfire litigation
By Justin Kloczko
Civil Litigation
Quinn Emanuel challenges Woolsey Fire judge’s disqualification order
By Gina Kim
Civil Litigation
Commission accepts Woolsey judge’s invitation to file amicus
By Gina Kim
Civil Litigation
SoCal Edison settles public entity wildfire claims for $360M
By Gina Kim
Civil Litigation, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
9th Circuit denies Boeing’s effort to keep fire suit in federal court
By Gina Kim
