Facts

Fidel Maldonado Acosta and Fidencio Maldonado Acosta owned and operated Acosta & Company. The business which specialized in fences, was operated out a of a warehouse located in Desert Hot Springs. In 1999, a fire broke out at the warehouse following two explosions. The fire destroyed the entire business.

Thereafter, an inspection of the destroyed warehouse by a licensed fire investigator revealed that the cause of the fire was a short in electrical wires. Evidence of burned wiring was also observed leading to a water pumping station. Southern California Edison (SCE) provided power to the Acosta's business. Two circuits were run on utility poles around the area where the fire occurred. The pole that serviced the Acostas' business was number 333426s.

The fire investigator determined that electrical breakers on that pole had interacted with another breaker that was hanging from that pole and that an electrical malfunction took place at the pole that serviced the plaintiff's property. However, no malfunction of other electrical equipment was noted to have caused the wire damage. The Acostas filed a lawsuit against SCE, alleging that it negligently maintained its electrical system. As a result, an electrical surge occurred, causing the fire.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The evidence of burned wire was proof that an over-voltage had occurred. The plaintiffs claimed that a voltage surge caused the fire that destroyed their warehouse and the surge was caused because the defendant breached its duty to the plaintiffs.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant sent one of its own employees to assess the conditions of the pole in question and did not determine that electrical breakers had interacted. The pole also contained a lightning arrestor which according to the defendant, was the only thing that was damaged after an SCE inspector investigated the area. It therefore denied the claim that its negligence caused the fire, claiming lightning may have been the culprit.

The defendant claimed that one of its circuits located one mile from the plaintiffs' warehouse experienced problems after lightning struck and caused a fire to break out. The defendants contended that the lightning strike may have caused problems with the lightning arrestor as well.

Damages

The plaintiffs sought $226,155 to replace their warehouse. They also sought $193,434 to replace equipment and tools that perished in the fire and $26,055 for losses that included their mortgage and other business-related property.

Result

Arbitration award: $355,000. After settlement discussions failed, the parties entered into arbitration.

Other Information

Initially, the defendant prevailed during arbitration before Andrew Patterson Esq. The plaintiffs then filed a Request for Trial de Novo.