Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 2, 2022

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP v. PG&E Fire Victim Trust

Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Docket
4:21-cv-07118
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
5
BankruptcyDiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In PricewaterhouseCoopers v. PG&E Fire Victim Trust, Judge Gilliam denied PwC leave to appeal a bankruptcy discovery order compelling documents.

Who this affects

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP and the PG&E Fire Victim Trust; the ruling also closed PwC’s appeal from the bankruptcy court’s discovery order.

What happened

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP asked the federal court to let it appeal a bankruptcy court order requiring PwC to produce documents to the PG&E Fire Victim Trust. The dispute involved documents concerning PwC’s work for PG&E.

The court said the bankruptcy court’s order was a routine discovery order, not a final order that PwC could appeal automatically. The court also found no sufficient legal reason to allow an immediate appeal of the non-final order, and said an appeal would further delay the discovery dispute.

Judge Gilliam denied the motion for leave to appeal, directed the clerk to close the appeal, and terminated the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP v. PG&E Fire Victim Trust · No. 4:21-cv-07118
Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Date
Feb. 2, 2022

Background

PG&E Corporation and Pacific Gas and Electric Company filed bankruptcy cases under Chapter 11 in 2019. The bankruptcy court later confirmed PG&E’s reorganization plan and authorized creation of the Fire Victim Trust to administer and resolve fire-victim claims. PG&E assigned the Trust certain claims against third parties, including people who provided services involving PG&E’s budgeting, capital allocations, or compliance with laws governing utility operations.

Before the plan was confirmed, the Official Committee of Tort Claimants served PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) with a subpoena under Bankruptcy Rule 2004. PwC objected based on overbreadth, burden, and privilege. The bankruptcy court entered an August 11, 2021 order requiring PwC to produce certain categories of documents and directing further briefing about documents from PwC’s work on PG&E’s General Rate Case. On August 24, 2021, the bankruptcy court ordered PwC to produce those General Rate Case documents. PwC sought permission to appeal that order and also sought a stay, but the bankruptcy court denied the stay and directed PwC to comply.

Legal standard

A district court may hear an appeal from a final bankruptcy-court judgment, order, or decree. A non-final bankruptcy order may be reviewed only if the district court grants permission to appeal. The court explained that permission for an immediate appeal of a non-final order is reserved for exceptional circumstances and is evaluated using standards similar to those governing immediate appeals from non-final district-court orders.

Court’s analysis

The court held that the August 24 order was not final. It was a routine discovery order compelling production of documents and did not resolve or seriously affect substantive rights in the required way. Therefore, PwC could not appeal it as of right.

The court also declined to grant permission for an immediate appeal. It found that PwC’s challenge did not present a controlling legal question with a substantial basis for disagreement. Instead, the court characterized the dispute as fact-intensive and ordinary. It further found that an appeal would delay an already prolonged discovery dispute rather than materially advance the litigation.

Disposition

The court denied PwC’s Motion for Leave to Appeal. It directed the clerk to close the appeal and terminate the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.