Updates to our Terms of Use

We are updating our Terms of Use. Please carefully review the updated Terms before proceeding to our website.

Wednesday, May 1, 2024 | Back issues
Courthouse News Service Courthouse News Service

Dozens of insurers sue Xcel energy over Colorado fire damage

The Marshall Fire sparked at the end of 2021 and caused $2 million in damages.

BOULDER (CN) — Dozens of insurance companies banded together to sue utility company Xcel Energy in the District Court of Boulder County for money paid out following the 2021 Marshall Wildfire which destroyed $2 billion worth of Colorado Front Range property.

Led by Allstate Fire and Casualty Insurance Company, the 37-page complaint filed Thursday night alleged inverse condemnation and negligence against Xcel Energy, which serves power to 3.7 million customers across the west and 2.1 million natural gas customers.

An investigation by the Boulder County Sheriff's Office attributed two causes to the fire: embers from a loose Xcel Energy power line and the remains of a scrap fire that had been buried on Christmas Eve. Winds reaching 100 miles-per-hour stirred the sparks through drought-dried brush and ignited the 6,000-acre fire, which killed two people and destroyed 1,000 structures.

A trail camera captured footage of the utility's unmoored powerline near the Marshall Mesa Trailhead on Dec. 30, 2021, as well as subsequent photos of a small fire spreading along Highway 93.

The wind carried flaming particles from the Boulder trail across drought-drained land to nearby Louisville and Superior.

The insurance companies contend that Xcel used old electrical equipment that was vulnerable in an area that is known to observe high winds.

“Plaintiffs allege the Marshall Fire was caused by negligent and improper maintenance, inspection, ownership, and operation of the electrical equipment owned, operated, and maintained by Xcel Energy," they said in the lawsuit.

As a public utility under the Colorado Constitution, Xcel must also compensate individuals for the taking of private land for public use.

“Xcel Energy’s electrical utility operations are 'essentially for the public benefit' within the meaning of Colorado’s taking law, and the Marshall Fire that resulted from Xcel Energy’s operations constituted a taking for the public use,” the plaintiffs argued.

The complaint asks for damages to be proven during a jury trial.

The plaintiffs are represented by attorneys from several different firms, led by Joel Radakovich of Austin’s Grotefeld Hoffman.

The energy company faces four other civil suits filed by dozens of residents who lost their homes in the fire. More than 20 complaints have been lodged by residents at their insurance companies for inadequate coverage of damages.

Representatives from Xcel Energy did not immediately respond to an inquiry for comment.

Follow @bright_lamp
Categories / Energy, Environment, Weather

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Loading...