Oregon Wildfire Victims Back Jury Instruction in $1B PacifiCorp Case
Oregon wildfire victims defend jury instructions in their $1 billion lawsuit against PacifiCorp.
Why it matters: The case highlights growing legal risks for utilities linked to wildfire damages and evolving jury instruction standards in large environmental class actions. Legal practitioners must watch for precedent in wildfire liability and class trial procedures.
- A June 2023 jury found PacifiCorp liable for negligently failing to cut power during a windstorm causing the 2020 Oregon wildfires.
- The jury awarded over $1 billion in damages, including $305 million to 16 victims of the Santiam Canyon fire.
- PacifiCorp appealed, challenging jury instructions that allowed jurors to apply trial evidence to all class members.
- In April 2026, the Oregon Court of Appeals reversed the liability verdict citing prejudicial error in the jury instruction.
- On November 3, 2026, the Oregon Supreme Court heard arguments from wildfire victims defending the original jury instruction.
In a major wildfire liability case, Oregon wildfire victims have strongly defended the jury instructions used in their billion-dollar class-action lawsuit against PacifiCorp related to the 2020 wildfires.
In June 2023, a jury found PacifiCorp liable for negligence for not shutting off power during a windstorm that ignited extensive wildfires across Oregon. The jury awarded more than $1 billion in damages, which included $305 million to 16 victims of the Santiam Canyon wildfire, as reported by OPB.
PacifiCorp appealed the verdict, focusing on the jury instruction that allowed the jury to consider all evidence as applying equally to every member of the class, which consists of over 2,400 individuals. The Oregon Court of Appeals reversed the original liability verdict in April 2026, calling the instruction prejudicial error, according to the decision documented at Justia.
On November 3, 2026, the Oregon Supreme Court heard arguments wherein wildfire victims vocally supported the original jury instruction approach. Nicholas Rosinia, the attorney for the wildfire survivors, noted, "At the end of the day, what they really don’t like is the jury verdict in this case." Meanwhile, PacifiCorp's attorney Theodore Boutrous described the class action as extremely complex, highlighting the single-class jury instruction that allowed jurors to treat diverse class members and fires as one big class.
This case puts a spotlight on shifting legal standards regarding utility companies' responsibilities during wildfire risk periods and the procedural challenges in managing large class actions based on environmental harm. As the Oregon Supreme Court deliberates on the jury instruction's validity, the ruling could significantly impact wildfire litigation and class certification processes nationwide.
By the numbers:
- $1 billion+ — total damages awarded to wildfire victims
- $305 million — awarded to 16 Santiam Canyon wildfire victims
- 2,400+ — number of class members in the lawsuit
Yes, but: The Oregon Court of Appeals reversed the original liability verdict due to the contested jury instruction, reflecting legal disagreement about proper class treatment.
What's next: The Oregon Supreme Court's upcoming decision on the jury instruction will determine if the $1 billion verdict stands or if a new trial is necessary.