Retired Judge Joins Suit Versus LA Utility After Losing Home

A retired federal judge who oversaw a $1 billion settlement for some of the state’s largest wildfires has joined a lawsuit against the nation’s largest public utility providing water and power after losing his home in the Pacific Palisades.

Background of the Lawsuit

Jay Gandhi, who served as a mediator between cities and Pacific Gas & Electric after the Camp, Butte and North Bay fires, joined the complaint against the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, the Los Angeles Daily News reported.
Gandhi and his family lost their home in the Palisades fire in early January.

Details of the Suit

He joins a suit filed on Jan. 13, which now represents more than 750 fire plaintiffs. U.S. District Court Judge Dean Pregerson, who also lost his home in the fire, joined the lawsuit as well.
Gandhi is focused on getting the city to take accountability for his family, neighbors and friends affected by the Pacific Palisades fire, which burned 5,000 homes, businesses and more.
“It was a sense of security and safety that went up in smoke on Jan. 7,” Gandhi said while announcing his participation in the lawsuit in front of his charred property.

Allegations Against LADWP

The suit focuses on the lack of water in the Palisades, alleging that two reservoirs key to public use in the area were not full.
It claims that the LADWP left overhead power lines energized, instead of doing a public safety shutoff, which other major utility companies in the state do during red-flag warnings. A red flag warning was in place at the time of the Palisades fire.
“With these reservoirs out of commission, hydrants in Pacific Palisades failed after three (3) tanks each holding one million gallons of water went dry within a span of 12 hours,” the complaint reads.

Response from LADWP

LADWP officials pushed back on the allegations, saying the utility’s systems were well managed.
“It is expected to see plaintiffs joining lawsuits at this early stage to preserve their claims,” a statement from the utility said.
“However, long-settled law and precedent prevent water utilities, and their rate payers, from being liable for wildfire losses,” it said. “Fire codes and regulators determine the capacity of public water systems to fight fires, and LADWP’s system exceeded those standards.”

Precedent and Investigation

LADWP attorneys from Munger, Tolles & Olson are relying on a 1911 California Supreme Court decision to defend the utility against multiple lawsuits blaming LADWP for running out of water to fight the blaze. Simply put, attorneys argue, the utility didn’t have a contract to provide the water.
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.

Conclusion

Gandhi said he believes that the fire was preventable and that the trial could be a “piecemeal” part of restitution for those who lost homes, businesses or both in the Palisades fire. There is precedent for holding a water board responsible for wildfire damage, he said.
“The city must stand up and claim responsibility and do right by the residents of the Palisades. And that’s why I joined this battle,” he said.
Gandhi served for eight years as a United States Magistrate Judge for the Central District of California, the nation’s largest federal court. Before the bench, he was a partner at the Paul Hastings law firm, based in Century City. In 2019, he presided over the $1 billion settlement involving PG&E and 14 local governments.

FAQs

1. Who is Jay Gandhi and why is he in the news?
   Jay Gandhi is a retired federal judge who has joined a lawsuit against the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power after losing his home in the Pacific Palisades fire.
2. What is the lawsuit about?
   The lawsuit alleges that the LADWP was responsible for the Palisades fire due to lack of water and failure to shut off power lines during a red flag warning.
3. How has LADWP responded to the allegations?
   LADWP officials claim that their systems were well managed and that they are not liable for wildfire losses.
4. Is there precedent for holding a water board responsible for wildfire damage?
   Yes, according to Gandhi, there is precedent for holding a water board responsible for wildfire damage.
5. What is the current status of the lawsuit?
   The lawsuit represents over 750 fire plaintiffs and is ongoing, with Gandhi and others seeking accountability and restitution for their losses.

Read more

Insurers in crosshairs of two lawsuits over collusion in fire coverage

Tariff uncertainty clouds LA wildfire rebuild efforts

City Council looks to take Measure ULA funds for wildfire aid