A lawsuit filed by residents who were impacted by January’s Palisades Fire claims to have evidence a second blaze occurred shortly after the initial fire, causing more destruction and devastation to the seaside community.
In the complaint, fire victims are blaming the Los Angeles Department of Water for running out of water during the blaze and say some energized power lines fell hours after the fire sparked, creating a second emergency. The lawsuit was filed against LADWP and the city of Los Angeles.
Attorneys representing the fire victims said they believe power lines fell during the high winds, igniting a second fire about 12 hours after the Palisades Fire began. The lawsuit states some burned power poles appear to match the location of where a shower of burning material was captured by a fire watch camera.
“It shows what we believe to be a new fire that started in the exact location of where those poles snapped,” Alex Robertson, a lawyer representing the fire victims, said. “And, the power lines came down at 10:30 at night.”
According to Robertson, the timing of that fire watch image also aligns with the accounts of several residents who said they saved their homes by extinguishing embers from the first wave of the fire, only to lose them the next morning. They believe their homes were lost after a second line of fire went through the neighborhood.
“We have video taken by several of them of this wall of fire, and it’s coming exactly from the location of where those broken power poles and downed power lines were that we found two and a half months earlier,” Roberton said.
LADWP initially said power circuits in the area were de-energized long before the Palisades Fire. When pressed for clarification by Robertson, however, attorneys defending the department said those circuits were actually electrified the day of the fire.
“After further pressing, we finally got a written response and buried in a footnote on the last page of a letter from a lawyer, they said, ‘Well, regarding DWP’s statement to the Washington Post that the lines had been abandoned or de-energized, it was a misunderstanding. Actually, the lines were energized on the day of the fire.’”
How will the City of Los Angeles stay afloat in 2025? It’s facing a massive budget deficit and considering layoffs, spending millions on fire recovery, and is planning to spend even more money rebuilding the Fire Department after years of under-funding its infrastructure.
——————————————————————————–
In this NBCLA original podcast “The Leonard Files,” Investigative Reporter Eric Leonard takes a closer look at critical issues following the devastating Los Angeles wildfires as well as other important stories affecting Southern California. Send us news tips regarding the Palisades Fire and Eaton Fire. http://4.nbcla.com/GATH7PD
The department confirmed the matter in the following statement to NBC4:
“The LADWP power line referenced in recent litigation concerning the Palisades Fire had been de-energized for several years before the fire. It was, however, re-energized in 2024 for operational needs and was energized at the time the fire started.”
LADWP also said that fire investigators have not asked to examine any of its lines or equipment and added that none of its lines pass over the area where the Palisades Fire first started. The department also said it took other precautionary measures with electric lines before and during the fire.
Robertson argued that even if the blaze ignited in a completely different way, the city could be responsible if there’s evidence that proves the second ignition occurred.
“Under the law, DWP can be liable, even if they were a concurrent cause,” he said. “They don’t have to be the sole cause of the fire, but if they are a concurrent cause of starting multiple spot fires, an additional major fire at 10:30 at night that destroyed homes and merged with the main fire.”
So far, no official cause for the Palisades Fire has been declared. Investigators have not said if the theory in the lawsuit is being examined.
[publish_date
