Introduction to the Case
The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is arguing that it cannot be sued for not providing enough water to fight the Pacific Palisades fire, citing a 114-year-old court ruling. Attorneys from Munger, Tolles & Olson, a Los Angeles law firm, are relying on a 1911 California Supreme Court decision to defend the LADWP against multiple lawsuits blaming the utility for running out of water to fight the blaze that started Jan. 7. Simply put, attorneys argue, the utility didn’t have a contract to provide the water.
Background of the Argument
“California courts have long rejected attempts to hold water utilities liable for a failure to provide water to fight fires, absent some specific contract to do so,” wrote LADWP lawyers in a document submitted to the court. Attorneys have cited the case of Niehaus Bros. Co. v. Contra Costa Water, which involved a dispute between a utility and landowner whose mill burned down after he stopped paying his water bill. In that case, the landowner had a contract with one water district to supply water to fire hydrants on his property, but stopped paying when the district changed hands and the new owners raised the rates.
Counterargument
Alexander Robertson, one of the attorneys suing LADWP, said the argument doesn’t make sense, especially since the utility’s own manual states the reservoir for the Pacific Palisades area was built specifically to aid fire suppression and other “customer needs.” Additionally, Robertson said the lawsuit does not allege breach of contract, but rather inverse condemnation, meaning government action caused the damage — an argument that he said is exempt from immunities cited by LADWP. “LADWP’s reliance upon a 114-year old case misses the mark,” Robertson said.
The Incident and Its Aftermath
The agency’s 117-million-gallon reservoir in Pacific Palisades had been empty for nearly a year, awaiting repairs to its cover. That left the community with only 3 million gallons of water in three separate tanks to fight the mammoth fire. The hydrants went dry after 12 hours. Calling the lack of water “deeply troubling,” Gov. Gavin Newsom has ordered an independent investigation into the LADWP’s management of the reservoir and water system.
Expert Insights
Martin Adams, former general manager and chief engineer for the LADWP, said he is unfamiliar with any contract that would promise continuous water for firefighting. “I don’t know if the city would issue a contract like that, that would leave no room for a big break or to do more work. That would make it impossible to do routine maintenance,” Adams said. He added that LADWP’s water system wasn’t designed for such a big fire and outperformed standards, even with the dry Santa Ynez Reservoir. LADWP customers are bound by the utility’s rules for service, which state the agency does not guarantee a continuous or sufficient supply or freedom from interruption, Adams noted.
Conclusion
The legal battle between the LADWP and the victims of the Pacific Palisades fire is ongoing, with the utility arguing that it cannot be sued due to the lack of a contract to provide water for firefighting. However, attorneys for the plaintiffs argue that this argument is flawed, citing the utility’s own manual and the concept of inverse condemnation. As the investigation into the LADWP’s management of the reservoir and water system continues, it remains to be seen how the court will rule on this matter.
FAQs
- Q: What is the LADWP arguing in the lawsuit?
A: The LADWP is arguing that it cannot be sued for not providing enough water to fight the Pacific Palisades fire because it didn’t have a contract to do so. - Q: What court ruling is the LADWP citing in its argument?
A: The LADWP is citing a 1911 California Supreme Court decision, specifically the case of Niehaus Bros. Co. v. Contra Costa Water. - Q: What is the counterargument presented by the attorneys suing LADWP?
A: The attorneys argue that the lawsuit does not allege breach of contract, but rather inverse condemnation, meaning government action caused the damage, and that the LADWP’s reliance on a 114-year-old case misses the mark. - Q: What is the current status of the investigation into the LADWP’s management of the reservoir and water system?
A: Gov. Gavin Newsom has ordered an independent investigation into the LADWP’s management of the reservoir and water system, which is ongoing.
