Free Consultation *-Required
Free Consultation (650) 453-3600
Menu
When PG&E’s electrical lines ignite a wildfire, resulting in damage to private property, the legal doctrine of inverse condemnation mandates that PG&E compensate for these losses, regardless of whether it was at fault. In California, inverse condemnation provides property owners with recourse when their property rights are adversely affected by government or public utility actions. Unlike conventional condemnation where property is taken for public use with compensation, inverse condemnation occurs when property is effectively taken without formal proceedings.
If you’ve suffered property damage from a wildfire sparked by PG&E, you have the right to seek compensation under inverse condemnation. At Danko Meredith, we specialize in representing individuals impacted by PG&E’s negligence, guiding them through the complex legal process of inverse condemnation claims. Our experienced California wildfire attorneys are dedicated to securing fair compensation for your losses, including coverage for property damage, economic losses, and emotional distress. Contact us today for a consultation to understand your legal options and pursue justice for the harm caused to your property.
Table of Contents
When PG&E’s electrical lines spark a fire, and the fire damages someone’s real or personal property, PG&E must pay for the damage. It must pay even if it did nothing wrong. That’s because of the legal doctrine of “inverse condemnation,” a doctrine somewhat unique to California.
We have all heard of “condemnation.” That’s when a governmental entity uses its power of eminent domain to take someone’s property for public use. For example, the government may take private property to build a road in an area. If a public or utility company such as PG&E wishes to take the property to, say, put powerlines through it, the utility must file a lawsuit in court against the property’s owner. The purpose of the lawsuit is to determine how much the utility has to pay to the property’s owner.
Sometimes, a public utility such as PG&E does something that constitutes a “taking” of private property without court authority. Usually, the “taking” is the result of the utility’s actions adjoining the owner’s property that renders the owner’s property worthless. The doctrine of inverse condemnation allows the property owner to sue the utility, requiring the utility to pay for what it took.
As one court explained:
An inverse condemnation action is an eminent domain action initiated by one whose property was taken for public use. (Barham v. Southern Cal. Edison Co. (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 744, 752.) The authority for such an action “derives from Article I, section 19 of the California Constitution, which states in the relevant part: `Private property may be taken or damaged for public use only . . . when just compensation . . . has first been paid to, or into court for, the owner.’” (Pacific Bell Telephone Co. v. Southern California Edison Co. (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 1400, 1404.) The policy underlying inverse condemnation is to spread among the community (through the public entity’s taxing authority) any burden disproportionately borne by an individual member of the community whose property is taken for a public use. (Barham, at p. 752.)
When a utility starts a fire, such as the Dixie Fire, and the fire spreads to and damages private property, that is considered a “taking” of private property. The property owner is held liable and permitted to sue the electrical utility to obtain “just compensation” for the property that was taken.
PG&E isn’t a governmental entity. Rather, it is a privately owned utility. Nonetheless, because PG&E has the power of eminent domain, the doctrine of inverse condemnation applies to PG&E just as to governmentally-owned utilities. See Pacific Bell, at pp. 1407-1408; Barham, at p. 748.
One other thing about wildfire liability claims that is highly unusual: In most lawsuits, each side must pay its own attorneys’ fees. In inverse condemnation lawsuits, PG&E must pay the attorney fees of the private party who is suing it. According to the Code of Civil Procedure section 1036:
“In any inverse condemnation proceeding, the court rendering judgment for the plaintiff by awarding compensation, or the attorney representing the public entity who effects a settlement of that proceeding shall determine and award or allow to the plaintiff, as a part of that judgment or settlement, a sum that will, in the opinion of the court, reimburse the plaintiff’s reasonable costs, disbursements, and expenses, including reasonable attorney, appraisal, and engineering fees, actually incurred because of that proceeding in the trial court or in any appellate proceeding in which the plaintiff prevails on any issue in that proceeding.”
When we bring a Dixie Fire claim against PG&E on a client’s behalf, we do so under the law of inverse condemnation.
Inverse condemnation is a legal doctrine that allows property owners to seek compensation when the government or a public utility has effectively taken their property rights without formal condemnation proceedings. Understanding the criteria and legal standards for inverse condemnation claims is crucial for those affected by incidents like wildfires involving entities such as PG&E.
Criteria for inverse condemnation claims include:
Inverse condemnation typically arises when government actions or actions by public entities destroy or significantly impair private property. This can include actions by utilities or power lines, like PG&E, whose equipment or operations cause property damage.
Property owners must demonstrate in bankruptcy court that they have not been compensated adequately or at all for the damage caused by the government or public entity’s actions.
Inverse condemnation provides an important legal recourse for property owners whose rights have been infringed upon by government actions or public utilities like PG&E.
Courts have recognized that even though PG&E may not have intended to cause harm to fire victims, its failure to maintain equipment or adhere to safety regulations can still constitute a “taking” under inverse condemnation laws. Property owners affected by wildfires have successfully argued that their property rights were violated due to PG&E’s actions or failures, leading to compensation for damages.
Navigating the complexities of inverse condemnation and PG&E wildfire claims requires specialized legal expertise and advocacy. Attorneys play a crucial role in helping property owners seek compensation and navigate the legal challenges associated with these claims.
Attorneys specializing in inverse condemnation understand the nuances of California law and the legal standards required to prove that a governmental or public utility action constitutes a “taking” of private property. They provide invaluable guidance on whether your case meets the criteria for inverse condemnation, including demonstrating substantial interference with property rights and establishing causation between PG&E’s actions and property damage.
Experienced attorneys conduct thorough evaluations of wildfire-related claims, including gathering evidence such as expert testimonies, witness accounts, and documentation of property damage. They develop strategic approaches tailored to each client’s situation, whether negotiating settlements through mediation or preparing for litigation in court. This strategic approach aims to maximize compensation for property losses, economic damages, and emotional distress caused by PG&E’s actions.
Attorneys serve as dedicated advocates for property owners throughout the legal process. They handle all interactions with PG&E and its legal representatives, ensuring that their client’s rights are protected and their voices heard. From filing legal complaints to representing clients in court proceedings, attorneys leverage their expertise to pursue fair and just outcomes for their clients.
Attorneys skilled in inverse condemnation are adept at negotiating favorable settlements on behalf of their clients. They engage in mediation processes to reach agreements that adequately compensate property owners for their losses without the need for prolonged litigation. This approach not only expedites the resolution process but also alleviates the emotional and financial burdens on property owners affected by PG&E’s actions.
The doctrine of inverse condemnation stands as a vital protection for property owners affected by wildfires sparked by PG&E’s operations. When PG&E’s electrical infrastructure triggers fires like the Dixie Fire, property owners have the right to seek just compensation under California law, irrespective of PG&E’s intent. This legal principle ensures that individuals whose properties are damaged or destroyed can hold PG&E accountable for the losses incurred, including property damage, economic impact, and emotional distress. Through inverse condemnation, the burden of property losses caused by public utilities like PG&E is rightly distributed, safeguarding property rights and community well-being.
At Danko Meredith, we specialize in representing individuals in inverse condemnation claims against PG&E and other public utilities. Our experienced attorneys are committed to advocating for your rights and securing the compensation you deserve for the harm caused by PG&E’s actions. If you have been affected by a wildfire or property damage caused by PG&E, contact us today for a free consultation. Call (650) 453-3600 or complete our contact form today. Don’t wait — take the first step towards recovering what you’ve lost and holding PG&E accountable for its responsibilities.
