Wildfire Recovery Counsel

Yes, in many cases. When a wildfire is caused by a utility company's equipment (a failed transformer, downed conductor, contact with vegetation, or other infrastructure failure), the utility can be held liable under multiple legal theories. These include negligence (the utility failed to maintain its equipment or vegetation in a safe condition), trespass (the fire caused damage to your property), nuisance (the fire interfered with your use and enjoyment of property), and in some states inverse condemnation (which imposes strict liability on public utilities for damage caused by their equipment). The viability of a claim depends on the specific facts of the fire, the type of utility involved (investor-owned, municipal, or cooperative), and the laws of the state where the fire occurred.

The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) is a federal statute that allows private parties to sue the United States for damages caused by negligent acts of federal employees or contractors. In wildfire matters, the FTCA can apply when a fire was caused by the federal government's negligence in managing federal lands, conducting controlled burns, fighting fires, or maintaining federal infrastructure. The FTCA has specific procedural requirements, including a strict notice provision: claimants must file an administrative claim with the responsible federal agency before filing a lawsuit, typically within two years of the fire. Claims arising from "discretionary functions" of federal agencies are generally excluded, which can be a significant defense.

The right path depends on the specific fire, the timing, the parties involved, and the client's situation. In some major fire matters, individual lawsuits offer the most direct path to recovery and the most control over case strategy. In others, class actions or mass tort proceedings aggregate similarly situated claims for efficient resolution. When the defendant utility has filed for bankruptcy (as happened with PG&E after the 2017-2018 California fires and Hawaiian Electric after the 2023 Maui fires), recovery may flow through a court-supervised settlement trust rather than direct litigation. Each path has different timelines, recovery levels, and procedural requirements. We work with clients early in the engagement to evaluate which combination of paths best fits their circumstances.

Inverse condemnation is a legal doctrine that allows property owners to recover compensation when a government or quasi-government entity damages their property through public improvements or operations, even without formal eminent domain proceedings. In states that apply this doctrine to utilities (most notably California), public utilities can be held strictly liable for property damage caused by their equipment, without the property owner needing to prove negligence. The doctrine's application varies significantly by state. California has the strongest inverse condemnation framework for utility-caused fires; other states recognize the doctrine more narrowly or not at all. We evaluate the availability of inverse condemnation claims as part of the initial case assessment.

Possibly. When firefighting operations deliberately destroy private property to create firebreaks, conduct backfires, or otherwise prevent a fire's spread, the property owner may have a claim under the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause for just compensation. The legal standard is that property taken for public use must be compensated, and intentional destruction in firefighting operations can constitute a taking when the purpose was to achieve a broader public benefit (saving other properties or stopping the fire's progression). These claims are distinct from negligence-based claims and have their own procedural requirements. The strength of a takings claim depends on whether the destruction was intentional, what alternative actions were available, and what public benefit was achieved.

Yes. Receiving insurance proceeds does not eliminate your right to pursue claims against the parties responsible for the fire. If your insurance company has paid you for fire damage, the insurance carrier typically holds a subrogation right to recover from the at-fault party for the amounts they paid out. Your remaining damages (uninsured losses, deductibles, personal property not fully covered, business interruption losses beyond policy limits, emotional distress, and other items insurance may not have covered) remain your own to pursue. The collateral source rule in most jurisdictions generally prevents the at-fault party from reducing your recovery based on insurance payments you received. Coordination with your insurance carrier on subrogation is part of the engagement process.

Wildfire cases typically resolve in one to three years, though the path varies significantly based on whether the matter proceeds as an individual lawsuit, a class action, a federal claim under the FTCA, or through a court-supervised settlement trust. Direct litigation cases tend to resolve in the standard one-to-three-year range. Bankruptcy and settlement trust cases can take longer because they depend on the court's process for evaluating, prioritizing, and distributing claims; some claimants in major utility bankruptcy proceedings have waited five years or more for full distribution. We work with clients to project realistic timelines based on the specific recovery path each client's circumstances call for.

As soon as it is safe to do so, document everything. Take photographs and video of the fire damage to your home, outbuildings, vehicles, and surrounding property before any cleanup or demolition. Preserve charred materials, damaged structures, and the immediate fire-affected area if local authorities permit. Inventory personal property losses with as much detail as possible, including receipts, photographs from before the fire, appraisals, and any documentation of value. Save all correspondence with insurance carriers, government agencies, and contractors involved in cleanup or rebuilding. Document medical and mental health impacts, evacuation costs, and lost income. The earlier this documentation begins, the stronger the eventual claim.

When a defendant in major wildfire litigation files for bankruptcy (as with PG&E after the 2017-2018 California fires and Hawaiian Electric after the 2023 Maui fires), the bankruptcy court often establishes a settlement trust to evaluate and pay fire victim claims. The trust takes the place of individual lawsuits against the bankrupt defendant: claimants file proofs of claim with the trust, the trust evaluates each claim against established criteria, and payments are made from a pool of assets (often including company stock, cash, and insurance proceeds). Settlement trusts can offer faster resolution than litigation in some cases, but recovery levels depend on the total claim volume and available assets. Each trust has its own filing deadlines, documentation requirements, and distribution procedures.