Federal attorneys filed three cases against Southern California Edison last week, seeking payment for damages and the cost of fighting the 14,000-acre 2025 Eaton Fire in Altadena, the 28,300-acre 2022 Fairview Fire in Hemet, and a small fire in Fresno.

Although the Eaton complaint said that Southern California Edison (SCE) caused the fire, it said the investigation into the cause is ongoing, and did not provide any new facts.

“Our thoughts are with the community affected by the Fairview Fire. We are reviewing the lawsuit and will respond through the appropriate legal channels. We continue our work to reduce the likelihood of our equipment starting a wildfire. Southern California Edison is committed to wildfire mitigation through grid hardening, situational awareness and enhanced operational practices. The Eaton Fire was heartbreaking. While the cause of the fire is still under investigation, we will review this lawsuit and respond through the appropriate legal channels,” SCE Spokesman Jeff Monford said over the phone.

The federal government has brought 13 other cases against SCE since 2007.

“The lawsuits filed today allege a troubling pattern of negligence resulting in death, destruction, and tens of millions of federal taxpayer dollars spent to clean up one utility company’s mistakes,” said Acting United States Attorney Bill Essayli in a press release. “We hope that today’s filings are the first step in causing the beginnings of a culture change at Southern California Edison, one that will make it a responsible, conscientious company that helps – not harms – our community. Hardworking Californians should not pick up the tab for Edison’s negligence.”

Eaton complaint

The Eaton complaint says that the fire was ignited from faulty power infrastructure or sparks from SCE infrastructure. SCE operates three transmission towers in Eaton Canyon, Pasadena, the complaint says. 

The complaint based its argument on a July 31 SCE quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), two reports made by the company to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), and a comment from Edison International President Pedro Pizarro.

The SEC report discussed the company’s lawsuit risk related to the fire.

“Multiple lawsuits related to the Eaton Fire have been initiated against SCE and Edison International. SCE's ongoing internal review into the facts and circumstances of the Eaton Fire is complex and will require significant time. SCE's review includes ongoing inspections of its facilities and records and of third-party information and testing. While SCE has not conclusively determined that its equipment caused the ignition of the Eaton Fire, concerning circumstantial evidence suggests that SCE's transmission facilities in the preliminary area of origin could have been associated with the ignition of the fire. Additionally, SCE is not aware of evidence pointing to another possible source of ignition. Absent additional evidence, SCE believes that its equipment could have been associated with the ignition of the Eaton Fire and, in light of pending litigation, that it is probable that Edison International and SCE will incur material losses in connection with the Eaton Fire. In July 2025, SCE announced that it would launch a program in the fall of 2025 that will allow individual plaintiffs to seek expedited resolution of their claims. Given SCE's ongoing review into the cause of the Eaton Fire and, among other things, the complexities associated with estimating damages, uncertainties related to the sufficiency of insurance held by plaintiffs and uncertainties related to litigation processes, Edison International and SCE are currently unable to reasonably estimate a range of losses that may be incurred,” the report said (bolded sentences quoted in the complaint).

The complaint’s reference to the CPUC reports said that the company detected a fault on one of its transmission lines around the time that the Eaton Fire started, about five miles from the fire’s origin.

“SCE admitted that it detected a ‘fault’ on one of its transmission lines around the time that the Eaton Fire started,” the complaint says.

The reports said that the fault was detected an hour after the fire was started, along a line that does not traverse the Eaton Canyon.

The complaint references a comment made by Pizarro, the Edison International President and Chief Executive Officer, on a July 31 earnings call.

“On the Eaton Fire, the investigations by SCE and the LA County Fire Department remain ongoing. There are no additional disclosures on the ignition or estimated cost at this point. To recap, SCE is not aware of evidence pointing to another possible source of ignition. Absent additional evidence, we believe that SCE equipment could have been associated with the ignition. In addition, numerous lawsuits have already been brought against SCE. If it is determined that SCE’s transmission equipment was associated with the ignition of the Eaton Fire, based on the information we have reviewed thus far, we remain confident that 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,” Pizarro said (bolded sentences quoted in the complaint).

The complaint calls for SCE to pay back over $40 million in fire fighting costs and resource damages related to the fire.

Fairview Fire

The Fairview Fire, however, was caused by a sagging  power line that came in contact with a Frontier Communications messenger cable, and resulting sparks ignited vegetation directly below the lines, that complaint says. The fire burned 14,000 acres of National Forest System lands, the Red Mountain Lookout and 44 structures. Two people died, and four people were injured. The complaint charges SCE with three different types of negligence and trespass by fire. It does not name a cost.

Nutmeg Fire

The Fresno suit was filed Sept. 2, on the three-year anniversary of the nine-acre Nutmeg Fire. It was brought by US Attorney for the Central District Eric Grant. The fire occurred solely on SCE property, and lasted one week. A SCE contractor, Matthew Marvin, told a Forest Service officer that he could have accidentally caused the fire when removing trees, according to the complaint. Marvin, president of Mountain Property Services, was hired by SCE to clear vegetation. He stopped working at 11:30 a.m., due to a high fire threat, according to the complaint. The temperature was 91 degrees Fahrenheit, with 20% humidity, wind speeds of 4 miler per hour and gusts of 14 miles per hour.  An SCE employee reported the fire at 2:30 a.m., and Marvin told a Forest Service officer that the fire may have been caused by his machinery. The Forest Service sent SCE a $821,000 bill for Forest Service fire suppression efforts on Sept. 27, 2023. SCE sent the bill to Mountain Property Services on March 24. The money has not been paid. Mountain Property Services is also named as a defendant, but is listed as suspended by the Secretary of State’s office. The complaint charges one count of negligence and negligence per se, and asks for the bill to be paid.

Previous cases

Federal prosecutors brought a case against the company on September 1, 2023, to recover costs related to the 2020 Bobcat Fire. The fire in the San Gabriel mountains burned 116,000 acres. The complaint said the Forest Service sustained fire suppression costs in excess of $56 million, property and natural resource damages of over $65 million and emergency responds costs of more than $769,000 dollars. They settled the case on May 14 under undisclosed terms.

Prosecutors also sued SoCal Edison on June 7, 2023, for the 2017 Creek Fire. The fire burned 15,000 acres north of Los Angeles. The suit said the Forest Service suffered $3 million in fire-suppression costs and $40 million in restoration and rehabilitation costs. The parties settled on March 20.

A Dec. 3, 2020 case seeking $100 million in response to the 2017, 282,000-acre Thomas Fire also resulted in a settlement.

Share this article
The link has been copied!