Utilities ask Supreme Court to look at inverse condemnation

Utilities file amicus briefs with US Supreme Court

Utilities are throwing support behind San Diego Gas & Electric Co.'s long-running bid to pass uninsured wildfire liability on to consumers, arguing companies already face significant economic harm because of inverse condemnation.

Amicus briefs were filed Thursday with the U.S. Supreme Court by Pacific Gas & Electric Co., Southern California Edison Co. and Edison Electric Institute. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, 18-1368 (U.S. Supreme Court, April 29, 2019).

Denying recovery of inverse condemnation liability is an uncompensated taking as it imposes all the costs of damage from public improvements on SDG&E, the amici argued.

Private utilities already face significant harm from the current inverse condemnation scheme, and insurance costs are skyrocketing after "wildfire season" became the new normal.

It leaves utilities to face billions of dollars in liability which they cannot socialize as can a public entity, the amici states.

Law firms who authored amici are Jones Day, Vinson & Elkins LLP and Hueston Hennigan LLP.

"We are pleased to have the support of the Edison Electric Institute and others for our U.S. Supreme Court petition," SDG&E spokesperson Helen Gao said Monday in a statement.

"The briefs show that significant Constitutional issues are at stake that deserve a resolution from the highest court of the United States," she added.

Michael S. Aguirre of Aguirre Severson LLP represents a ratepayer fighting SDG&E.

The utilities are not a friend of the court but merely interested parties, he said, adding that the utility has not raised any issues important enough for the court to hear the case.

The court is expected to decide this fall whether to hear the case.

The high court has requested the respondent California Public Utilities Commission file a response to SDG&E's petition by July 1.

-- Gina Kim