Oregon Class Action Lawsuits: PacifiCorp, Foster Care, Consumer

Oregon class action lawsuits currently span wildfire liability, foster care reform, consumer protection, securities fraud, and prison conditions, with the largest by dollar value being the multibillion-dollar case against PacifiCorp over the 2020 Labor Day fires. State-court class actions are governed by Rule 32 of the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure, and Oregon has developed a distinctive framework for what happens to unclaimed settlement money. Several major cases are still moving through state and federal courts as of 2026.

PacifiCorp Wildfire Class Action

The largest active class action in Oregon is James v. PacifiCorp. Thousands of residents and business owners allege the Berkshire Hathaway-owned utility negligently failed to shut off power lines during a Labor Day 2020 windstorm, sparking four wildfires that damaged more than 2,000 properties.¹

A 2023 jury found PacifiCorp acted with gross negligence and was liable for economic, noneconomic, and punitive damages.² The case then moved into a series of “mini-trials” to determine individual damage awards, beginning in January 2024. By late March 2026, juries across roughly 15 completed trials had awarded approximately $1.23 billion to 190 plaintiffs, with 167 additional trials scheduled through 2027.³ A February 2026 verdict alone awarded $305 million to 16 plaintiffs tied to the Santiam Canyon fire.⁴

The April 2026 Appellate Reversal

On April 8, 2026, the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled that the original class action trial was “procedurally flawed.”⁵ In an opinion by Judge Anna Joyce, the three-judge panel found the trial court gave a legally erroneous jury instruction telling jurors they could “assume that the evidence at the trial applies to all class members.” Because the four fires had distinct causation theories, the appellate court concluded the blanket instruction was prejudicial.⁶

The ruling sent the case back to Judge Steffan Alexander in Multnomah County Circuit Court to reconsider whether a single class remains appropriate.¹ Plaintiffs’ attorneys called the decision a “procedural setback” and stressed the court did not overturn findings that PacifiCorp was negligent or caused harm.⁵ Plaintiffs had until May 13, 2026, to seek Oregon Supreme Court review.⁷

Parallel Settlements

PacifiCorp has settled claims on a parallel track. As of mid-2026, the company reported settling nearly 4,500 wildfire claims for roughly $2.2 billion.³ Major settlements include:

$575 million with the federal government over public lands burned in Oregon and California during the 2020 fires and the 2022 McKinney Fire.⁴
$250 million with commercial timber companies and $299 million with 463 individual plaintiffs over the Archie Creek Complex Fire.³
$178 million with 403 plaintiffs who opted out of the James class action.⁸
$125 million in October 2025 with Oregon wineries for smoke damage.⁴
$150 million with 378 plaintiffs over the Slater Fire in California.³

Berkshire Hathaway has estimated PacifiCorp’s total wildfire liability could ultimately reach tens of billions of dollars.¹

Wyatt B. v. Kotek Foster Care Reform

Disability Rights Oregon and A Better Childhood filed a federal class action in 2019 on behalf of children in Oregon’s foster care system, alleging the Oregon Department of Human Services violated their constitutional rights and protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The complaint described insufficient caseworkers, a shortage of foster homes, excessive out-of-state placements, and placement instability that put children at risk.⁹

After the state spent more than $22 million defending the case, the parties settled on May 24, 2024.¹⁰ Judge Ann Aiken issued final judgment on September 12, 2024, entering the settlement as a court order.⁹

Settlement Terms and Early Results

The state committed to a decade of reforms overseen by court-appointed neutral expert Kevin Ryan. Ryan’s July 29, 2025 Initial Review established 14 benchmarks, including reducing maltreatment in care to 9.07 or fewer incidents per 100,000 care days by September 2029 and ensuring 90% of children have case plans within 60 days of entering care by April 2028.¹¹ The agreement ends when the neutral expert determines the state is in “substantial compliance” or after ten years, with a possible two-year extension.¹²

ODHS published its first semi-annual progress report on May 1, 2026. On-time case plans rose from 39.5% in 2021 to 81%, and placements with relatives climbed from 18.8% in 2022 to 36.1%. The maltreatment-in-care rate, however, sat at 24.7 incidents per 100,000 care days against a goal of 9.07, though the department noted Oregon counts more incident types and uses lower evidentiary thresholds than many other states.¹³

In August 2025, the Ninth Circuit ruled that “child in care” under the settlement covers all children in ODHS legal custody, not only those physically placed in foster homes, extending protections to an estimated 600 to 700 additional children.¹⁴

Consumer Protection Cases

Oregon has been a consistently active state for consumer class actions, driven in part by its Unlawful Trade Practices Act and a procedural rule that redirects unclaimed settlement funds toward legal aid rather than the defendant.

Scharfstein v. BP West Coast Products

Often cited as Oregon’s landmark consumer class action, Scharfstein v. BP West Coast Products LLC challenged a 35-cent debit card fee charged without proper notice at ARCO and am/pm stations. A 2014 jury returned a roughly $400 million verdict. The settlement paid 1.7 million consumers about $92 each in an initial round, with a second payment to follow. Around $66 million in unclaimed funds could not revert to the defendant under Oregon law and instead funded the nonprofit Oregon Consumer Justice and a $3 million consumer protection research program at the University of Oregon.¹⁵

Grocery Outlet Deceptive Pricing

Filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court on June 2, 2025, Stewart, Franz, and Sullivan v. Grocery Outlet alleges the discount retailer ran a “widespread, coordinated scheme” of fabricated price comparisons, displaying vague “Elsewhere” reference prices without identifying any real competitor.¹⁶ The case, brought on behalf of an estimated 100,000-plus Oregon customers, is active.¹⁷

Bohr v. Tillamook County Creamery Association

This putative class action alleges that Tillamook’s marketing suggested its dairy products came from small family farms along the Oregon Coast when a significant portion of its milk was sourced from a large industrial dairy near Boardman.¹⁸ Lower courts dismissed the claims in 2020 and 2022, holding plaintiffs needed to plead individual reliance. In April 2025, the Oregon Supreme Court reversed, holding that a specific showing of reliance by each consumer is not always required under the Unlawful Trade Practices Act.¹⁹ The decision lowers the barrier for “price-inflation” theories, though the court noted the case still faces hurdles on class certification and proving the marketing actually inflated prices.

NW Natural Greenwashing

Consumers filed Blumm v. Northwest Natural Gas Co. in Multnomah County Circuit Court in October 2024, alleging the utility’s Smart Energy Program constitutes greenwashing. Participants pay a monthly fee expecting to fully offset carbon emissions from their natural gas use, but the complaint alleges the offsets, derived from manure digesters at industrial dairies, lack additionality and permanency, and that program funds were partly used for marketing.²⁰ As of early 2025, the case was in the motion-to-dismiss phase.²¹

CenturyLink “Price for Life”

Two lawsuits challenge CenturyLink’s marketing of a fixed internet rate that plaintiffs say the company later raised. Rosing v. Lumen Technologies was filed in federal court in Oregon in November 2023 and seeks certification of a nationwide class and an Oregon subclass.²² A parallel state complaint was filed in Multnomah County in July 2024, and the Oregon Department of Justice disclosed an open investigation into the program.²³

Other Significant Oregon Class Actions

Aequitas Securities Fraud

Oregon’s largest securities class action settlement grew from the collapse of Aequitas Capital Management, which investors alleged operated as a Ponzi scheme. About 1,600 investors lost money. Filed in 2016 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, the case settled for $234.6 million with defendants including Deloitte, EisnerAmper, Sidley Austin, and TD Ameritrade. The court approved the settlement on December 17, 2019, allowing investors to recover an estimated 80% to 90% of their losses when combined with receiver asset sales.²⁴

Maney v. Brown: COVID-19 in Oregon Prisons

Maney v. Brown, filed in 2020, is a certified class action brought by incarcerated individuals who contracted COVID-19 in state prisons. Plaintiffs allege Oregon Department of Corrections officials showed deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The court certified a damages class for those who contracted the virus and a wrongful death class for those who died.²⁵ In June 2025, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of qualified immunity, holding that genuine factual disputes remain about masking, testing, quarantine, and housing policies.²⁶ The case is pending.

Unemployment Benefit Delays

Two class actions targeted delays at the Oregon Employment Department during the pandemic. Flores de Vega v. Gerstenfeld, filed in July 2020, settled in March 2021 with the agency required to meet federal timeliness standards, clear its adjudication backlog, and improve access for individuals with limited English proficiency. The settlement provided no direct monetary compensation but imposed reporting requirements through March 2023. Wurtz v. Gerstenfeld settled in June 2021, requiring the agency to extend deadlines and provide written explanations when Pandemic Unemployment Assistance documentation was rejected.²⁷

How Class Actions Work Under Oregon Law

Oregon state court class actions are governed by Rule 32 of the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure. To certify a class, the court must find the proposed class is too numerous for individual joinder, that common questions of law or fact exist, that the named plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the class, and that those plaintiffs will adequately represent the group. The court must also find a class action is “superior to other available methods” for resolving the dispute, weighing whether common questions predominate over individual ones and whether the case is manageable as a class.²⁸

For damages class actions, Oregon imposes a prelitigation notice requirement: representative plaintiffs must send written notice to the potential defendant at least 30 days before filing, demanding correction of the alleged wrong. The statute of limitations is tolled for all class members once the action is filed and resumes if a member opts out or the class is decertified.²⁸

A distinctive feature of Oregon’s system is what happens to leftover settlement money. Under ORCP 32O, at least 50% of unclaimed or impracticable-to-distribute settlement funds must go to the Oregon State Bar’s Legal Services Program to fund legal aid. The remaining half can go to an entity whose purposes are directly related to the class action or beneficial to the class members’ interests.²⁹ The creation of Oregon Consumer Justice from unclaimed funds in the ARCO debit card case is a prominent example of this provision at work.

1
Reuters. Berkshire-Owned PacifiCorp Utility Wins Ruling Related to Oregon Wildfire Damages
2
PacifiCorp Fire Litigation. James et al. v. PacifiCorp et al.
3
PacifiCorp. Information Wildfire Litigation
4
OPB. PacifiCorp Owes One Billion Oregon Wildfire Class Action Lawsuit
5
OPB. PacifiCorp Wins Victory Oregon Wildfire Lawsuit
6
Justia. James v. PacifiCorp, A183140
7
S&P Global Ratings. James v. PacifiCorp Appellate Ruling Analysis
8
PacifiCorp. Settlement Plaintiffs 2020 Labor Day Fires
9
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. Wyatt B. et al. v. Kotek et al.
10
The Oregonian. Court Ruling Expert Report Chart Next Steps for Oregon Foster Child Reforms
11
Oregon State Legislature. Neutral Expert Initial Review – Wyatt B. v. Kotek
12
Oregon Department of Human Services. Settlement Reached Oregon Foster Care Class Action Lawsuit
13
Oregon Department of Human Services. ODHS Publishes First Child Welfare Report Under Wyatt B. v. Kotek
14
Disability Rights Oregon. Ninth Circuit Rules on Critical Foster Care Definition in Wyatt B. v. Kotek Settlement
15
University of Oregon. Consumer Protection Research Gets Boost New Funding
16
Oregon Consumer Justice. Grocery Outlet’s Comparison Sales Strategy Misleads Consumers
17
Grocery Dive. Grocery Outlet Class Action Lawsuit Deceptive Pricing
18
Capital Press. Oregon Supreme Court Revives Legal Claims Against Tillamook Cooperative
19
U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Bohr v. Tillamook County Creamery Association, SC S069773
20
OPB. NW Natural’s Smart Energy Program Lawsuit Carbon Emissions Environment
21
Climate Case Chart. Blumm v. Northwest Natural Gas Co.
22
Tycko & Zavareei LLP. CenturyLink Price for Life Lawsuit
23
The Oregonian. CenturyLink Sued for Allegedly Breaking Internet Price for Life Guarantee
24
Hagens Berman. Aequitas Capital Management
25
ODOC COVID Class Action. Maney et al v. Brown et al
26
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Maney v. State of Oregon, No. 24-2715
27
Oregon Law Center. OED Litigation
28
Oregon Public Law. ORCP 32 Class Actions
29
Oregon Law Foundation. Oregon Cy Pres