This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Politics & Government

Attorneys for Blast Explosion Victims Question PG&E's Motives

Energy company accepts responsibility for San Bruno pipeline explosion before judge, but those representing victims express skepticism about PG&E's intentions.

 

Attorneys defending Pacific Gas & Electric appeared in court Friday to accept responsibility for causing the gas-line explosion in San Bruno that killed eight residents last year, but those representing the victims remain unimpressed.

PG&E's lead attorney Gayle Gough answered the call of San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Steven Dylina for the company to clearly state before the court in Redwood City its willingness to be accountable for the disaster and compensate victims for damages.

"PG&E accepts its responsibility," Gough said. "We are liable."

These statements followed the company's initial announcement Tuesday that acknowledged its role in causing the tragedy. 

Judge Dylina thanked Gough and PG&E for the willingness to step forward, and said that would allow the court case to progress more efficiently. 

He also commended the company's new Chief Executive Officer Chris Johns for his accountability.

But PG&E's admission did not satisfy those representing the hundreds of victims who have officially filed to receive compensation for the blast and resulting fire that occurred suddenly in a San Bruno neighborhood last September. 

"That is the most misleading statement about the case ever," said Frank Pitre, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, in regards to comments made by those representing PG&E.

Pitre refuted PG&E's claims before the court and challenged the company to accept full responsibility for the various charges of negligence and culpability found in the report authored by the National Transportation Safety Board. 

He said that until the company comes forward with court documents that officially accept full legal and financial responsibility for the tragedy, PG&E is leaving the door open to shift the blame onto a third party. 

"Words are meaningless. I want to see action," Pitre said. 

Instead, Pitre said he expects the energy company to eventually introduce the manufacturer of the faulty underground pipe that burst due to leaks in the welding as a scapegoat for the cause of the explosion. 

He called PG&E's effort to come clean in court nothing more than "a devious smokescreen."

Attorney Mike Danko, who represents 50 plaintiffs in a consolidated lawsuit against the company, echoed those sentiments.

"It's a publicity stunt," said Danko, of PG&E's statement. 

He also called for the company to admit in court documents to being responsible for the damages as well as express a willingness to fully compensate all those harmed in any fashion by the blast. 

But he said he doubted PG&E would take such a step. 

"They can't come to bring themselves to put it in writing," he said. 

Danko also said that he is representing about another 30 victims who will come forward to stake claim on compensation for damages caused by the blast. That will bring the grand total to nearly 400 people, from about 140 different households. 

Judge Dylina ruled Friday that as the case heads toward jury trial next summer, that each claim against PG&E will be assessed as either an incident of death, injury requiring at least $50,000 worth of treatment, injury that victim was subjected to the blast, shaking, fire, heat, smoke and debris or victims who suffered damage to their home. 

Under this ruling, attorneys representing victims and PG&E are to find cases that will serve to represent each category and submit them to a judge for mediation claims on damages. 

Each side is to select one case that best represents each category except incidences in which victims suffered exposure to the blast such as fire and shaking. Attorneys are to select two examples of cases they feel best represents those incidents, Dylina said. 

The case will return to court for further case management on Jan. 19, 2012.

About this column: An ongoing look at the Crestmoor neighborhood's recovery from a natural gas pipeline explosion that killed eight people, leveled 38 homes and sparked a widespread investigation of PG&E’s practices and service. The series will also look at the investigations into the cause of the accident, legal proceedings that followed the fire and how the community, near and far, has responded to the explosion.Related Topics: PG&E and San Bruno explosion

Find out what's happening in Belmontwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?