Guerrero

Guerrero v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

Good Law
178 Cal. Rptr. 3d 671·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 909·230 Cal. App. 4th 567
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 10, 2014A139429California3,304 words

Opinion

Opinion

Siggins, J.

Plaintiffs Filomena Guerrero et al. sued Pacific Gas and Electric Company for deceptively representing to California’s Public Utilities Commission and the public how much revenue it required to provide safe and reliable natural gas service. The class action complaint sought restitution and disgorgement of profits for PG&E’s wrongful diversion of more than $100 million in rates it collected over a 13-year period that should have been expended on natural gas pipeline safety projects.

PG&E demurred. It argued that Public Utilities Code section 1759 foreclosed plaintiffs’ claims because the PUC had exercised jurisdiction over PG&E’s rates, and a judgment for plaintiffs in a civil action would interfere with the continuing jurisdiction of the PUC in pending regulatory matters against PG&E. The trial court sustained PG&E’s demurrer without leave to amend. Plaintiffs appeal from the ensuing judgment.

We agree with the trial court that this putative class action would interfere with the PUC’s performance of its duties and affirm the judgment for PG&E.

BACKGROUND

On September 9, 2010, a PG&E natural gas pipeline exploded in San Bruno, California, causing death, great physical…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.