More than a dozen people at the site of the SCE transmission lines along Eaton Canyon on Monday March 17, 2025. (Photo by Dean Musgrove, Los Angeles Daily News/SCNG)
Attorneys clashed in court on Monday, March 17, over a key timeline on which Southern California Edison would provide information from planned power line inspections and testing, which plaintiffs argued is vital to preserving evidence related to whether the utility’s equipment ignited the Eaton fire.
The dispute was part of a two-hour-long hearing, where Judge Laura Seigle’s Los Angeles County Superior Court courtroom played host to dozens of attorneys representing plaintiffs in lawsuits against the utility.
The goal: To work through the logistical challenge of handling the multitude of cases filed against SCE, and to provide the protocol for the sharing of evidence in the case – from photographs to measurements to electrical testing and in-person examinations.
Related Articles
Residents air their anxiety, anger over Martinez Refinery fire at town hall
Firefighters battle blaze at San Rafael Airport
Eucalyptus trees removed in Los Gatos nature preserve to improve wildfire resiliency
California regulators provisionally approve State Farm steep homeowner rate hike
Harvey Rosenfield of Consumer Watchdog’s been taking on insurance industry for three decades
Those cases, more than 130, allege that the Rosemead-based utility’s equipment ignited the catastrophic blaze.
While both SCE and plaintiff attorneys agreed on the majority of topics and protocols Seigle brought up around the logistics of the case, SCE and plaintiffs clashed on power line inspections and testing that had been scheduled for this week and next.
SCE and investigators for the victims this week were expected to begin physically inspecting the equipment.
The close-up inspections will include scaling three transmission towers and testing power lines under investigation for possible links to the fire’s origin, said Edison spokesperson Kathleen Dunleavy. To date, the towers had only been inspected by drones.
Attorney Howard Maycon, a liaison counsel for “subrogation” plaintiffs — a group that includes insurance companies seeking reimbursement for damages arising from the fire — said SCE indicated it would provide the plaintiffs with images and video from the inspections four days after the work was completed. But he argued that timeline was not soon enough to be able to preserve evidence prior to further testing next week.
“They’re going to run current through towers on Monday that could destroy the evidence as to why this fire occurred,” Maycon said.
SCE attorneys said that wasn’t true, the back-and-forth prompting Seigle to interject.
Seigle pressed SCE about making the information available to plaintiffs in a more timely manner.
Doug Dixon, an attorney for SCE, said the company would work toward providing the information sooner, technology allowing.
“We continue to work through the process to make sure there is a thorough and transparent investigation and appreciate the court’s time and guidance today,” SCE Spokesperson Diane Castro said Monday afternoon.
Besides Edison investigators, electrical engineers representing the plaintiffs in the litigation — including Los Angeles County and the cities of Pasadena and Sierra Madre — will be collaborating in the inspection.
“It’s a huge step toward determining the mechanism of the fire,” said attorney Michael Artinian, one of the lawyers representing victims of the Eaton fire, which destroyed more than 9,000 structures and killed 17 people, said last week. “We already have a lot of evidence to show the sparking that caused the fire, now we’re looking at the mechanism, the ‘how.’”
Alexander Robertson, another attorney representing victims, told the Southern California News Group last week that plaintiffs have been requesting access to Edison’s transmission towers and power lines since the fire occurred.
Despite the dispute over the timeline of the information sharing, Seigle presided over the hearing, attended by more than 50 attorneys representing individuals, public entities, insurance companies and class actions.
“Thank you everybody for making what looks like significant progress on getting things organized,” Seigle said to begin the proceedings.
Ultimately, a case management order signed by Seigle late Monday afternoon lays out a protocol for how the cases will move forward and how new lawsuits will be integrated into the process.
Discussion on Monday ranged from direction to attorneys about providing physical copies of documents so as not to bog down the court’s online systems to how information from power line inspections will be shared to plaintiffs.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Laura Seigle during a court proceeding about lawsuits filed against SCE over responsibility for the start of the Eaton fire in Los Angeles on Monday, March 17, 2025. (Photo by Hans Gutknecht, Los Angeles Daily News/SCNG)
Along with the individual plaintiffs, L.A. County, Pasadena and Sierra Madre joined a list of “public entity” plaintiffs earlier this month, each filing their own lawsuit. At a Board of Education meeting last week, the Pasadena Unified School District announced it would be initiating litigation against Eaton fire-related defendants, including SoCal Edison.
“The County appreciates the Court’s diligent and efficient management of this important litigation,” Assistant County Counsel Scott Kuhn said in a statement. “The County views this case as a critical part of the recovery and rebuilding process for the Altadena community that was so impacted by the Eaton Fire.”
On Monday, a goal was to consolidate the cases, for the sake of “efficiency” of managing the process. That included appointing attorneys that would act as “liaisons” between the clients, firms and the court.
With Seigle’s approval, the following lawyers were appointed as liaisons: Amanda L. Riddle of Corey, Luzaich, de Ghetaldi & Riddle; Gerald Singleton of Singleton Schreiber; and Rahul Ravipudi of Panish Shea Ravipudi.
Attorneys also sought the judge’s sign-off on efforts to preserve evidence in the case, seeking “protocols for inspection and testing of SCE equipment and substations” in the area of the fire.
Attorney Doug Dixon, representing Southern California Edison (SCE), during a court proceeding about lawsuits filed against SCE over responsibility for the start of the Eaton fire in Los Angeles on Monday, March 17, 2025. (Photo by Hans Gutknecht, Los Angeles Daily News/SCNG)
The lawsuits point to eyewitness accounts, photographs and videos depicting arcing from Edison power lines and flames burning at the bottom of transmission towers.
The suits contend that sparks from the lines or current from an exposed grounding wire made contact with the brush. They also criticize SCE for not deenergizing all the power lines in Eaton Canyon after the utility was warned days ahead that powerful winds were coming.
Edison has notified the Public Utilities Commission of irregularities in the system when it reenergized lines in the canyon, noting a “small flash of white light.”
A state and county investigation into the official cause of the fire is underway. Edison is also conducting its own investigation.
Much of the physical inspection will focus on three towers in the area where lawsuits allege the fire began, including one tower that was de-energized more than 50 years ago. One of the allegations is that the tower somehow became reenergized and triggered the fire.
Ultimately, the stakes are high for Edison, including for the company’s own solvency.
Edison International said its transmission operations were managed responsibly, even if its equipment is found to have started the fire.
SCE “would make a good faith showing that its conduct with respect to its transmission facilities in the Eaton Canyon area was consistent with actions of a reasonable utility,” Edison Chief Executive Officer Pedro Pizarro said during the company’s earnings call last month.
Attorneys Amanda Riddle, left, and Gerald Singleton representing plaintiffs during a court proceeding about lawsuits filed against SCE over responsibility for the start of the Eaton fire in Los Angeles on Monday, March 17, 2025.(Photo by Hans Gutknecht, Los Angeles Daily News/SCNG)
But in the wake of the fires, utilities have faced ramped-up scrutiny from residents and leaders, mindful that the state’s utilities have started some of the state’s largest wildfires. PG&E Corp., for instance, was forced to declare bankruptcy over such a finding.
According to Reuters, Edison had lost about a third of its market value since the Eaton Fire erupted Jan. 7, destroying more than 9,000 structures and cause damage estimated at $7 billion to $10 billion.
Under California reforms designed to improve utility wildfire safety practices, a utility can recover from customer damage claims related to a fire tied to its equipment if regulators determine that it acted prudently.
The next court hearings are scheduled for April 3 and April 17, both at 10 a.m. in Los Angeles County Superior Court.
SCNG staff writer Tony Saavedra contributed to this report.
