Challenges of proving standing and causation in California wildfire-related death and illness claims

California's wildfires have produced devastating losses, including fatalities, respiratory illness and long-term health impacts for those exposed to them. Impacted victims and their families frequently seek compensation from those believed to be responsible. California law provides multiple legal remedies--including causes of action for negligence, wrongful death, public nuisance, inverse condemnation and product liability--but the right to pursue these claims, ab initio, depends upon two prerequisites: proving standing to bring the claim in the first instance and establishing causation between the wildfire and the claimed damage or injury.  

Standing

Standing requires a plaintiff to evidence a specific injury derivative of the defendant's conduct that can be remedied by the court. In wildfire cases, this is a predicate the absence of which is summarily fatal to the plaintiff's claim.

California's Code of Civil Procedure § 377.60, the wrongful death statute, limits recovery to specific categories of survivors of the decedent, such as spouses, domestic partners and children.

For wildfire personal injury plaintiffs, the claimed injury must be sufficiently certain or concrete to give rise to an actionable injury claim. Even with evidence seemingly consistent with a claimed wildfire-related injury, plaintiffs must produce medical documentation linking their condition to the wildfire and distinguish it from preexisting issues or other exposures. The absence of medical support or other factors, such as delayed or nonexistent treatment, can create enough doubt for a court to find the absence of standing.

Plaintiffs who suffered purely economic losses--lost wages due to evacuation, business interruption or a reduction in property value--might also be determined to lack standing under California's economic loss doctrine, which holds that negligence claims must be tied to personal injury or property damage. Thus, absent a statutory exception or contractual right, individuals who evacuated safely (without "run for your life" emotional trauma) and suffered only financial harm may be determined to lack standing.

Causation

Even when standing to bring a wildfire-related bodily injury claim is established, plaintiffs must still overcome the challenge of proving causation. California law requires the plaintiff to establish that the defendant's conduct was a substantial factor in causing (or the proximate cause of) the claimed damage. This can be challenging, especially if the plaintiff had a preexisting condition, the symptoms of which mirror those of wildfire smoke inhalation.

Wildfires occur for many reasons, several of which are natural, such as lightning strikes and climate change, and the ensuing damage can be exacerbated by drought and unprecedented wind events. Developing scientific and environmental theories regarding the relationship between wildfires and their frequency create often-disputed alternative cause and origin theories that can complicate a plaintiff's causation hurdle. 

Determining the ignition source of a wildfire (and correspondingly, the party responsible, if any, for such) can involve the forensics of experts in engineering, utility-line construction and maintenance workers, meteorologists and criminal arson investigators. Regarding utilities specifically, the investigation will focus upon whether equipment malfunctioned, the design and maintenance of such, the sufficiency of the vegetation management program and whether a downed or damaged power line was the initiating event. Complicating the matter, the true point of ignition might be compromised or destroyed, creating obvious evidentiary complications for the plaintiff's burden of meeting the "substantial factor" requirement. The cause and origin analysis can also be delayed when governmental authorities take immediate and exclusive custody of suspected ignition source evidence attendant to their own investigation.

In wildfire wrongful-death claims, the plaintiff must typically prove the decedent either died directly in the fire or suffered fatal injuries during the attempted evacuation. If the death occurred at a later date, the plaintiff must provide medical expert testimony demonstrating that wildfire smoke was a substantial factor in the death.

With respect to certain plaintiffs, wildfire-related Illness claims will have to be distinguished from other maladies, such as allergies, respiratory conditions and viral infections.

Accordingly, plaintiffs will generally need to rely upon credible expert testimony to establish that the smoke from this particular wildfire event was in fact the cause of the claimed injury. Defense experts will explore whether the plaintiff's smoke-related injury claim is supported by not only the medical evidence, but also whether the plaintiff's proximity to the smoke, duration of exposure and the degree of smoke at that location are consistent with the claimed injury, or whether these parameters can be established at all.

Wildfire litigation typically involves numerous potential defendants, including utility companies; vegetation management subcontractors; public agencies and entities; those who design, manufacture, construct and/or maintain equipment; and private landowners whose negligent vegetation management may have contributed to the intensity or duration of the fire and, in some cases, ensuing mudslides, erosion and debris flow during follow-on storm events. Comparative fault principles allow liability to be apportioned among the several defendants, but plaintiffs still carry the burden of establishing the proportionate share to be allocated to each.

In summary, standing requirements for wildfire-related injury claims establish who can sue. Establishing causation obligates plaintiffs to invest in credible investigations and related forensics that, they will argue, eliminate alternative or contradictory explanations for the cause and origin of the wildfire and the claimed wrongful death, as well as smoke-related and/or emotional distress injuries.

This content is intended for general informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. If you require legal or professional advice, please contact an attorney.