Home News & Insights Settlement Reached with PacifiCorp for $125 Million on Behalf of Oregon Wineries

Settlement Reached with PacifiCorp for $125 Million on Behalf of Oregon Wineries

Ben Cannon

Author

On October 19, 2025, utility provider PacifiCorp agreed to pay $125 million to resolve claims brought by 93 wineries and vineyards in Oregon’s Willamette Valley arising from the 2020 Labor Day wildfires. The plaintiffs, several of whom rank among the state’s most prominent wine producers, alleged that PacifiCorp’s negligence caused extensive smoke damage to grapes at a critical point in the harvest season, resulting in substantial economic loss and long-term reputational harm.

Plaintiffs alleged that PacifiCorp failed to de-energize power lines during a severe wind event, despite warnings from fire officials. Plaintiffs further asserted that the company did not properly maintain its equipment or conduct adequate vegetation management. As a result, utility equipment allegedly sparked fires that blanketed the Willamette Valley in smoke, ash, and soot. The damage occurred during harvest, when grapes were either mature on the vine or exposed in open-air bins. These conditions rendered the fruit and resulting wine unsellable.

King Estate Winery, one of the lead plaintiffs, estimated $31.9 million in losses. More than 30 wineries were prepared to proceed to trial in Multnomah County Circuit Court in early November 2025, seeking over $180 million in compensatory damages in addition to punitive relief.

The settlement, finalized in October 2025 prior to the trial date, was achieved through mediation overseen by retired Judge Karsten Rasmussen and concludes one of the most consequential wildfire smoke cases involving agricultural plaintiffs to date. It also brings the total recovery from PacifiCorp related to the 2020 Labor Day wildfires to approximately $750 million.

The wineries and vineyards were represented by Watts Law Firm LLP of Austin, Texas, BakerHostetler LLP of San Francisco, California, and Arnold Gallagher P.C. of Eugene, Oregon. The firms collaborated closely to advance claims on behalf of nearly 100 wine businesses affected by the 2020 wildfires.

Although PacifiCorp has continued to deny responsibility in certain fire zones, including the Santiam Canyon Fire, the utility has resolved thousands of claims to date and issued public statements expressing willingness to settle remaining claims. The resolution of the winery matters follows a series of verdicts and settlements in Oregon wildfire litigation and comes amid growing scrutiny of utility practices and legislative proposals concerning liability exposure.

Table of Contents

Background: Wildfire Smoke and Widespread Loss in Oregon’s Wine Region

The Labor Day 2020 wildfires marked a catastrophic event for agricultural producers across Oregon, with the state’s wine industry among the hardest hit. Plaintiffs alleged the responsibility for the file fell directly on PacifiCorp, the owner of Pacific Power, Oregon’s second-largest electric utility, who failed to cut power during extreme fire weather conditions despite repeated warnings from fire officials. The fires ignited during a windstorm, and smoke from multiple blazes ultimately blanketed large portions of the state.

Not only was PacifiCorp’s equipment active during the dangerous weather event, but it was also inadequately maintained. Plaintiffs contended that the company neglected to remove trees and vegetation near its lines, resulting in fires that produced smoke, ash, and soot at the worst possible time for winemakers: harvest. The exposure to smoke occurred when grapes were still on the vine or had been recently picked and were awaiting processing in open bins, leaving them vulnerable to airborne particulates and volatile phenols known to degrade wine quality.

This litigation unfolded against a broader backdrop of escalating wildfire liability claims against PacifiCorp across the state. The utility, a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway Energy, has faced thousands of lawsuits since 2020, with total potential liability estimated to exceed $8 billion in Oregon and California combined.

Legal Proceedings: Claims of Negligence and the Path to Settlement

The legal claims brought by the 93 wineries and vineyards were rooted in theories of negligence and nuisance. Plaintiffs alleged that PacifiCorp breached its duty of care by failing to power down electrical lines during a forecasted wind event, failing to adequately maintain equipment, and neglecting to remove hazardous vegetation near transmission corridors. These omissions, according to the complaints, directly contributed to the ignition and spread of wildfires that caused pervasive smoke damage throughout the Willamette Valley.

The litigation was resolved through mediation conducted by the Honorable Karsten Rasmussen, a retired Lane County Circuit Court judge who now serves as a mediator in complex civil disputes. The resolution came just weeks before the lead trial was set to commence, avoiding what would have been one of the most high-profile agricultural wildfire cases to reach a jury in Oregon. The $125 million settlement eliminates the need for trial while providing meaningful compensation to the wine industry claimants, many of whom had been waiting more than five years for closure.

Utility Response and Broader Settlement Context

In a statement issued following the announcement of the winery settlements, PacifiCorp confirmed its agreement to pay $125 million and expressed a desire to resolve remaining wildfire-related claims through negotiation rather than litigation. The company reiterated that it remains open to settling claims arising from the Echo Mountain and South Obenchain fires.

At the same time, PacifiCorp signaled its intention to continue defending against certain claims, most notably those related to the Santiam Canyon Fire. The utility pointed to a report by the Oregon Department of Forestry which concluded that its equipment did not significantly contribute to the spread of that fire, despite earlier findings by federal fire investigators suggesting utility involvement.

The Willamette Valley winery resolution is only one component of PacifiCorp’s broader wildfire litigation liabilities and settlements. The utility has now settled approximately 2,700 claims related to the 2020 Labor Day wildfires. These include:

$299 million paid to 463 individual plaintiffs in connection with the Archie Creek Fire;
$250 million in settlements involving ten corporate claimants affected by that same fire;
$178 million paid to 403 plaintiffs impacted by the Beachie Creek and Echo Mountain fires.

Although Oregon lawmakers introduced bills in 2025 that would have altered wildfire litigation frameworks or limited utility liability, none of those proposals passed. The Oregon Public Utility Commission, in a separate proceeding, declined to allow PacifiCorp to cap noneconomic damages, even in cases involving gross negligence, leaving utilities fully exposed to compensatory and punitive awards under existing law.

Statements from Counsel Representing Plaintiffs

Attorneys representing the winery and vineyard plaintiffs characterized the settlement not only as a measure of financial accountability, but also as evidence that the civil justice system remains the most effective forum for resolving complex wildfire claims. In public statements following the announcement, the legal team emphasized the importance of corporate responsibility, regulatory reform, and continued access to the courts for wildfire survivors.

Mikal Watts of Watts Law Firm LLP, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, praised PacifiCorp for its willingness to engage in good-faith settlement discussions and implement operational changes in the aftermath of the 2020 fires. “PacifiCorp has once again done the right thing,” Watts said. “This is what good companies do.” He further noted that the utility has taken concrete steps to improve its wildfire mitigation practices and make Oregon a safer place for residents and businesses alike.

Robert Julian of BakerHostetler LLP addressed broader concerns about legislative efforts aimed at limiting utility liability. He cautioned against what he referred to as “targeted, punitive legislation” that would interfere with private litigation. “Permitting the parties and the tort system to resolve wildfire cases has a proven track record of success,” Julian said. He pointed to California and other states that have implemented risk-pool frameworks to compensate wildfire victims while preserving utilities’ access to capital needed for grid modernization and safety investments.

Greg Lusby of Arnold Gallagher P.C., the third law firm involved in representing the wineries, commended both parties for engaging in a cooperative resolution process. He emphasized that Oregon is “now a much safer state” due in part to the accountability achieved through this and similar litigation.

Together, the attorneys’ remarks underscored a dual message: that utility-caused wildfires remain a pressing threat, and that meaningful legal recourse is essential not only for compensating past harm, but for driving future safety reforms.

A Settlement with Broader Significance

The $125 million settlement between PacifiCorp and 93 wineries and vineyards in Oregon’s Willamette Valley brings meaningful resolution to a dispute that has lingered since the devastating 2020 Labor Day wildfires. While the financial recovery compensates for a single season’s harvest, the litigation addressed much more than lost grapes. It raised fundamental questions about corporate responsibility, utility oversight, and the legal mechanisms available to communities harmed by preventable disasters.

For the plaintiffs, the resolution avoids years of continued litigation and restores vital economic resources to one of Oregon’s most celebrated industries. For PacifiCorp, the settlement reflects a recognition of the need to resolve claims and invest in long-term wildfire mitigation. And for the broader public, it reinforces the role of the civil justice system in ensuring that private entities are held accountable when their operations endanger lives, property, and livelihoods.

As wildfire threats increase across the Western United States, this case stands as a reminder that compensation and safety are not mutually exclusive. Timely resolution, guided by experienced counsel and supported by judicial mediation, can offer both. The law firms involved in this matter have not only secured a substantial recovery for their clients, but also contributed to a legal framework that demands vigilance, transparency, and meaningful reform.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and is based solely on publicly available sources, including news reports and a press release issued by the involved law firms. It does not constitute legal advice, nor does it create an attorney–client relationship. For questions regarding wildfire litigation or legal representation, please contact a licensed attorney.