Will cumulative PacifiCorp wildfire jury verdicts exceed $2B by year-end 2026?

The math requires bridging $1.63B in approximately 44 weekly mini-trials through December 2026, implying ~$37M per trial average. While the Black Swan Beacon rated per-claim verdict averages exceeding 2x reserved levels at 15-25% probability, the cumulative $2B threshold requires sustained high averages across dozens of trials. Oregon DOF exculpatory evidence for Santiam Canyon fire (60% of claims) is a major mitigating factor that could significantly reduce awards in the majority of cases. Federal government claims ($900M+) are unlikely to resolve as jury verdicts within this timeframe. The $2B threshold is plausible but represents the upper tail of the verdict distribution.

The PG&E precedent demonstrates that wildfire liabilities can cascade beyond initial estimates ($30B+ ultimate vs. lower initial reserves), but PG&E's trajectory played out over years, not within a single calendar year of jury verdicts. The committee noted no lens stress-tested PacifiCorp liability above $15B, creating an analytical gap, but the question asks specifically about cumulative jury verdicts exceeding $2B -- not total liability. Mini-trials typically produce smaller, more contained awards than full trials. The $370M cumulative to date was accumulated over a multi-year period; reaching $2B from verdicts alone within 10 months requires a dramatic and sustained acceleration that, while possible, represents a low-probability outcome given the exculpatory evidence and typical litigation timelines.

The verdict trajectory could accelerate nonlinearly. Once early mini-trial verdicts establish liability benchmarks, subsequent juries may anchor to those amounts, creating an escalation dynamic. The 130x gap between $370M in verdicts and $48B in total claims means even a small fraction of claims producing verdicts could drive cumulative totals significantly higher. The committee identified that per-claim averages approaching reserved levels could push cumulative verdicts past $2B within the trial schedule. However, the exculpatory evidence on Santiam Canyon (60% of claims) is the critical counterfactual -- if it gains legal traction, the majority of claims may produce minimal or zero verdicts. This creates a bimodal outcome distribution: either exculpatory evidence holds (low verdicts) or it fails (rapid verdict escalation). I weight the escalation scenario at roughly 25%.

The $1.63B gap to bridge in approximately 44 weekly mini-trials demands ~$37M per trial on average. This is far above typical mini-trial award sizes. The federal government claims ($900M+) would be the most plausible single source of a large verdict, but these are unlikely to reach jury verdict stage within 2026. The exculpatory evidence for 60% of claims (Santiam Canyon fire) creates significant headwinds for the majority of pending cases. The Black Swan Beacon's 15-25% probability for per-claim verdicts exceeding 2x reserved levels is the closest analog to this question, and my estimate aligns with the lower end of that range given the specific $2B cumulative threshold.

The trial acceleration is real but the math is demanding. $370M from all verdicts to date means the system needs to produce 4.4x more in 10 months than it has in the entire litigation history. Even with weekly mini-trials, many trials will result in defense wins, reduced awards, or hung juries. The exculpatory evidence on Santiam Canyon (60% of claims) materially weakens the plaintiff position for the majority of cases. The $2B threshold is a tail scenario. The committee's own assessment implicitly assumed containment at $5-10B total liability, and cumulative jury verdicts are only one component of total liability -- settlements, regulatory actions, and other mechanisms would contribute separately.

Weekly mini-trials starting February 2026 will produce a sustained stream of verdict data. The question is whether early verdicts establish high benchmarks that cascade through subsequent cases. The committee identified this as a documented analytical gap -- no lens stress-tested liability above $15B. If per-claim averages track at 2x reserved levels as the BSB identified at 15-25% probability, the trajectory toward $2B becomes more plausible. However, the resolution criteria specify 'jury verdicts and court-ordered damages' -- settlements are excluded, which narrows the pathway. More likely that verdicts reach the $800M-$1.5B range by year-end, with $2B requiring sustained high-end outcomes across most trials.

$370M to $2B in 10 months requires 5.4x growth. Weekly trials help but the math is steep. BSB flagged per-claim escalation at 15-25% probability, which aligns with the lower end given the specific $2B cumulative threshold. Exculpatory evidence on 60% of claims is the key mitigating factor.

Exculpatory evidence on Santiam Canyon fire (60% of claims) is the strongest mitigating factor. If these claims produce reduced or zero verdicts, the remaining 40% of claims would need to generate nearly all of the $1.63B gap. Even with weekly trials, this is a very demanding path. The $2B threshold is at the extreme tail of verdict outcomes.

PG&E analog and trial acceleration support escalation scenario. The 130x gap between current verdicts ($370M) and total claims ($48B) means even small shifts in per-claim averages produce large cumulative changes. But $2B in jury verdicts within one calendar year is historically rare for any litigation. Weekly mini-trials are an acceleration but not fast enough to reach $2B unless per-case averages are dramatically above historical patterns.