Pg&E Erin Brokovich Case Essay

1533 Words May 1st, 2013 7 Pages
True Story of Erin Brockovich
Anderson v. PG&E


Michael Kelly
Business Law
Professor Chowdry Erin Brockovich is the story of a woman who helped 650 people in Hinkley California get justice for the actions of Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E.) The case was titled Anderson v. PG&E and was actually settled outside of court. It was settled in the Superior Court for the County of San Bernardino, Barstow Division. The parties agreed on a settlement of $333 million to be distributed to the named plaintiffs. It is difficult to find the exact facts, statements, and decision reasoning of the case because the information is not public record. The information has remained private. It all started in
…show more content…
By having knowledge of the chromium in the water supply, PG&E should have been required to let the people know that were affected by it. By not telling the citizens, they were withholding information that affected these people’s lives. Because a risk was created, consequences came, and nothing was done to prevent such injuries that did occur, PG&E should have been considered negligent. Certain criteria should be considered when looking at a negligence case. Questions to be asked are; did the defendant owe a duty of care to the plaintiff? Did the defendant breach that duty? Did the plaintiff suffer a recognizable injury? Did the defendant’s breach cause the plaintiff’s injury (p.114, Miller)? The answer to all of these questions is yes when looking at this particular case. The defendant had a duty to report the chromium leaks to the people it could have affected. A breach of that duty occurred when the plaintiffs were not informed of the chemical in their water supply. The plaintiffs then suffered multiple injuries of various degrees because they were not informed of the chemical in their water. Because PG&E did not inform the people in the area, these injuries did occur. PG&E had a duty of care that they did not uphold. A duty of care is the duty of all persons as established by tort law to exercise a reasonable amount of care in their dealings with others. Failure to do so constitutes the tort of negligence (p.114, Miller). The basic idea is that people are
Open Document