Audit: Pacific Gas & Electric didn't spend $50M collected for pipeline safety and maintenance

[CreekDog]

2. Early on they tried to say that the victims, some dead, had contributory negligence

Disgusting.

In court, PG&E deflects blame for San Bruno blast
Jaxon Van Derbeken, Chronicle Staff Writer
Published 7:12 pm, Monday, July 11, 2011

...
The company also indicated it would seek to assign some of the blame for the losses from the explosion to residents themselves.

...

In its court filing, PG&E also said the blast victims themselves "may have been legally responsible under a doctrine of comparative negligence (or) contributory negligence" - factors that assign a portion of blame to a plaintiff.

PG&E's filing did not specify how residents might have been negligent, or how that negligence contributed to the fireball that consumed their homes.

...

PG&E also suggested the payments that the company has already made to some residents meant their lawsuits were invalidated "in whole or in part." The firm made cash payouts of $15,000 to $50,000 after the blast, on a scale that depended on the extent of damage, but said at the time that the payments had no bearing on civil damages.

...

San Bruno City Manager Connie Jackson said PG&E's court filing was "completely surprising." She added, "It's unfortunate that they have thrown everything plus the kitchen sink in this, to cover their legal strategy."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/In-court-PG-E-deflects-blame-for-San-Bruno-blast-2355029.php#ixzz2VGesMLQV