Potential $1B Class Action Against FPL Over Hurricane Power Outages Survives
Plaintiffs are asking the court to find gross negligence and breach of contract over FPL's monthly "storm surcharge."
May 02, 2018 at 01:45 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Daily Business Review
A proposed class action lawsuit against Florida Power & Light Co. over hurricane-related power outages has cleared its first hurdle: a motion by FPL to dismiss the case that plaintiffs counsel have said could be worth $1 billion.
FPL is the third-largest electric utility in the U.S. with about 4.9 million customer accounts that serve roughly 10 million people across Florida. Its website touts billing rates among the lowest in the nation.
But a group of plaintiffs has homed in on one fee — a monthly “storm surcharge” of $4 per 1,000 kilowatt hour — and is asking the court to find gross negligence and breach of contract over it.
The group claims the utility company billed customers for years, promising the money went to create infrastructure to prevent or control the number of power outages during major hurricanes. It claims FPL promised consumers its systems could resist winds traveling up to 130 mph, but fell far short of that in September, when Hurricane Irma hit the state with maximum sustained winds of about 105 mph.
Millions of homes lost electricity, and plaintiff counsel say the class could exceed 4 million members.
“Florida Power & Light charged a fee for this,” said plaintiffs counsel John H. Ruiz of the MSP Recovery Law Firm in Miami. “That quid pro quo wasn't met.”
FPL's attorney, Alvin Davis of Squire Patton Boggs, declined comment, and the company's media relations department did not respond by deadline. But court pleadings suggest FPL will maintain it spends billions on storm infrastructure. It also seems gearing to argue the plaintiffs failed to plead gross negligence by FPL that resulted in injury or loss.
Plaintiffs lawyers, though, point to prolonged blackouts ”in the sweltering summer heat” that FPL customers “exposed to dangerous conditions and … consequential damages.”
FPL moved to dismiss the complaint on several grounds including an alleged failure to identify an existing contract between the utility company and its customers, and a lack of jurisdiction. It argued the case belonged before the state's utilities regulator, Florida Public Service Commission, not the circuit court.
Miami-Dade Judge David C. Miller Monday disagreed, and refused to dismiss the suit. He also issued a sua sponte discovery order, requiring FPL to hand over its contract with customers within 60 days.
Now attorneys are gearing to file a motion by May 10, seeking class certification on behalf of named plaintiffs Heydi Velez, Miriam Perez, Guillermo Patino-Hidalgo, Mercedes Sastre, Carlos M. Colina, Shalom Navarro, Enrique Arguelles, Rubens N. Mendiola and Jose A. Zarruk.
Next, they plan to begin conducting discovery.
“We feel very confident we're going to certify a class against Florida Power & Light,” Ruiz said. “As consumers, we can expect more from a monopoly that charges us money in exchange for a promise that wasn't delivered.”
Ruiz teamed with plaintiffs lawyers Alfredo J. Armas, Gonzalo Dorta and Julio Acosta.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTravis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readLegal Speak's 'Sidebar with Saul' Part IV: Deliberations Begin in First Trump Criminal Trial
1 minute readJosh Partington of Snell & Wilmer Is in Fact a Rock Star in the Office (and Out of It)
1 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250