Today’s gas leak at the intersection of Glenview and Earl Avenue served as a frightful reminder to the Crestmoor residents of the September 2010 San Bruno explosion. For many residents the sight of fire engines and the call to evacuate will rekindle flashbacks and distressing dreams of the event. There’s no doubt that
this gas leak will exacerbate many San
With Trial Approaching, PG&E Launches $10 Million Ad Campaign
PG&E says that its first priority is safety. PG&E says its next priority is compensating the victims of the San Bruno fire.
But are those really PG&E’s priorities?
PG&E has just launched a multimedia advertising campaign designed to make itself look good. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the campaign will cost $10 million.
It
San Bruno Explosion Trial Date Moved
Though PG&E previously admitted liability for the explosion and stated that it was "committed" to fully compensating its victims, PG&E has asked the court to throw certain of plaintiffs’ claims out of court. In particular, PG&E has asked the court to throw out all the plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages, and to throw out certain
PG&E: Judge Picks Cases To Be Tried
At today’s court hearing, Judge Dylina tentatively selected the cases to be included in the trial that is scheduled to begin against PG&E on July 23:
- Bullis v. PG&E
- Estate of Franco v. PG&E
- Ruigomez v. PG&E
- Low v. PG&E
- Zapata v. PG&E
- Healy v. PG&E
- Chea v. PG&E
- Viscarra v. PG&E
The judge will
CPUC President Appoints Himself to Lead Investigation Against PG&E
In the five years leading up to the fire, the CPUC found that PG&E committed more than 400 safety violations. Each time, instead of fining PG&E, it let it off with a warning.
It was the CPUC’s job to keep the public safe from PG&E. The CPUC failed to do that job. The
PG&E’s Admission of Liability No More Than a Litigation Ploy
PG&E made a show of finally “admitting liability” for the explosion. What brought that about? A sudden pang of conscience?
Not quite.
PG&E’s latest move is classic litigation strategy. It’s designed to help PG&E escape full responsibility for what it did rather than own up to its responsibility. The move paves the way for PG&E to
San Bruno Judge Orders 16 “Representative” Fire Cases to Trial in 2012.
On July 2, 2012, trial will begin in 16 San Bruno Explosion cases. The Court ordered that the cases to be tried first will be representative of the following eight categories of lawsuits that have been filed:
- Wrongful death
- Serious bodily injury which required hospitalization.
- Minor bodily injury which required some medical treatment and total
The Public Reacts to PG&E Blaming San Bruno Victims
PG&E had the perfect opportunity to stand up in court and take responsibility for what it has done to the people of San Bruno. Instead, when it filed its written answer to the victims’ lawsuits, it denied everything, and blamed everyone else, including its victims. PG&E stated that it should not be required to compensate
PG&E Denies Everything
PG&E filed today its answer to the lawsuits brought by the victims of the San Bruno fire. This was PG&E’s first opportunity, legally speaking, to publicly account for itself in court.
PG&E owned up to nothing. Instead, the document lists the 32 reasons why PG&E says it is not responsible for the fire and the
PG&E Criminal Investigation Could Slow Victims’ Lawsuits
The Blue Ribbon panel appointed by the CPUC has blasted PG&E, suggesting that PG&E knew about the weaknesses in its system for years before the explosion but did
essentially nothing. According to Steve Johnson, writing for the San Mateo Times, the panel noted:
that an internal PG&E review three years before the San Bruno explosion had listed the company’s