Relevant Document:Notice of Hearing
Judge Dennis Montali today declined to grant a
temporary restraining order requested by the
ad hoc group of subrogation claimholders that would have prevented local officials in Butte County, California, “from removing, transferring, altering, and potentially destroying evidence without providing plaintiffs an opportunity to review and record that evidence. …” After hearing from counsel to the Butte County Attorney General, the debtors and the ad hoc group, respectively, Judge Montali ruled that he would defer to the judgment of law enforcement. Specifically, the AG indicated that law enforcement protocol does not include the participation of third parties in the collection of evidence. Judge Montali did not require the debtors to attend the evidence collection - alternative relief requested by the ad hoc group - but the debtors are also not prohibited from attending to the extent agreed upon with law enforcement.
On Tuesday, the ad hoc group filed an
adversary proceeding against Butte County and the debtors seeking the preservation of Camp Fire-related evidence and requesting that they be permitted to attend the evidence collection or, in the alternative, requiring the debtors to attend. According to counsel to the parties at today’s hearing, the evidence collection could happen or did happen as early as today.
Counsel to the debtors during today’s hearing stated that although the company initially accepted an invitation from law enforcement to attend the evidence collection, it heard complaints from civil plaintiffs that the company would then have unequal access to evidence potentially relevant to any civil tort claims and litigation. Accordingly, debtors’ counsel indicated that the company then declined the invitation to attend the evidence collection so that the company and civil plaintiffs would be on even ground.
During the hearing, the AG’s counsel explained the evidentiary process as follows:
- Evidence - specifically, sections of support towers - would be collected in accordance with law enforcement protocol and sent to the FBI law for testing.
- After testing, that evidence and any produced reports would be returned to local law enforcement.
- If criminal charges are pursued, any eventual defendant would have standard pretrial and other evidentiary rights to gathered and relevant evidence.
- If criminal charges are not pursued, any evidence would be returned to the owner - here, PG&E.
It is unclear what further relief the ad hoc group could seek through the adversary proceeding now that the TRO has been denied.