Nursing Home Razed by Fire Sues SCE Over Alleged Preventable Failure

PASADENA, CA – May 06, 2026 – More than a year after the catastrophic Eaton Fire reduced it to ash, a beloved community institution is fighting back. Two Palms Care Center, a skilled nursing facility that served Pasadena and Altadena for over 55 years, has filed a lawsuit against Southern California Edison (SCE) and its parent company, Edison International. The lawsuit alleges the utility's negligence and faulty equipment ignited the fire that not only destroyed the facility but also displaced 45 of its vulnerable, elderly residents, many of whom remain without a permanent home.

The suit, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court by the law firm Zimmerman Reed LLP, paints a damning picture of corporate failure in the face of predictable danger. It asserts that SCE ignored its own safety protocols and clear warnings from the National Weather Service, ultimately leading to one of the most destructive fires in California's history.

A Community Lost, A Trust Honored

For decades, Two Palms Care Center was more than just a building; it was a home. A family-owned facility with a reputation for compassionate care, it often had a waiting list of families seeking a trusted place for their loved ones. On the night of January 7, 2025, that trust was put to the ultimate test.

As sparks from SCE transmission lines allegedly ignited the brush in Eaton Canyon, wind-driven flames raced toward the facility. Staff had less than an hour. In a harrowing evacuation reported by the Los Angeles Times, caregivers moved 45 elderly and disabled residents—many bedridden or suffering from dementia—through thick smoke and falling ash on wheelchairs and rolling beds. Every single resident was saved.

"Every one of our residents chose Two Palms, and their families trusted us with the people they love most," said Juana Rodriguez, the facility's administrator. "On the night of the fire, our staff honored that trust—they went back through smoke and flames to make sure no one was left behind."

By dawn, the heroism of the staff was contrasted by the totality of the loss. The facility was gone. Abandoned wheelchairs sat on the scorched lawn in front of a still-standing sign, a ghostly reminder of the life that once filled the space. The residents were transferred to other facilities in what was hoped to be a temporary measure. More than 15 months later, many have not returned, their lives permanently disrupted.

"What we cannot accept is that a utility company's alleged failures made any of that necessary," Rodriguez stated. "Families in this community were waiting for a place they trusted—and now that place is gone. Filing this lawsuit is a necessary step toward rebuilding it and restoring the care this community still needs."

A Pattern of Warnings and a History of Fire

The lawsuit alleges the Eaton Fire was not an unforeseeable accident but the result of a chain of ignored warnings. Two days before the fire, the National Weather Service issued a Red Flag Warning. On January 6, 2025, that was elevated to a "Particularly Dangerous Situation"—its highest-level alert—forecasting life-threatening windstorms directly in the area. The complaint alleges that despite wind gusts exceeding SCE's own safety shutoff thresholds, the power remained on. At 6:11 p.m., the first electrical faults were detected, coinciding with reports of sparks in Eaton Canyon.

Central to Two Palms' case is an admission the complaint attributes to SCE's own internal investigation, which reportedly concluded that its equipment was the "likely the cause" of the fire. This acknowledgment mirrors a troubling history for the utility. SCE's equipment has been officially linked to other devastating blazes, including the 2017 Thomas Fire and the 2018 Woolsey Fire. Following those events, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) imposed hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties on SCE for failing to safely maintain and operate its infrastructure.

The complaint further alleges that outdated and inactive equipment remained near the ignition site and that automatic safety systems designed to prevent live wires from re-energizing after a fault were not properly enabled. While Cal Fire's official investigation into the Eaton Fire remains ongoing, the lawsuit argues that a clear pattern of negligence exists.

"This case is about whether the systems designed to prevent disasters like this were followed when it mattered most," said Caleb Marker, a partner at Zimmerman Reed. "Two Palms didn't just lose a building—the community lost a place that people depended on for care, stability, and dignity. This moment is about accountability."

The High Cost of Rebuilding Justice

The legal battle for Two Palms is not just about recovering the value of a lost building; it's about the ability to serve its community again. Built in 1959, the original facility operated under regulatory exemptions that have long since expired. Rebuilding from the ground up means constructing a facility that complies with all current, and significantly more expensive, building codes, accessibility mandates, and modern healthcare standards.

"Any rebuilt facility must meet current building codes, accessibility mandates, and updated healthcare facility standards," Marker explained. "That is not an obstacle to justice—it is what justice requires. Being fully restored means being able to serve this community again at the standard it deserves."

The lawsuit seeks to hold SCE responsible for these increased costs, arguing they are a direct consequence of the utility's alleged negligence. The seven causes of action include negligence, trespass, public and private nuisance, and inverse condemnation. The latter is a powerful legal doctrine in California that can hold utilities strictly liable for damages caused by their equipment, regardless of whether negligence is proven. This precedent was solidified in the wake of the 2018 Camp Fire, which drove Pacific Gas & Electric into bankruptcy.

The suit seeks compensation for the full scope of the disaster: property loss, business interruption, lost revenue, and the ongoing economic harm from being unable to operate. It also requests injunctive relief, demanding the court order SCE to comply with safety regulations to prevent future catastrophes. For a community still reeling from a fire that claimed 19 lives and nearly 10,000 structures, the outcome of this case represents more than just a financial settlement; it is a test of whether accountability can be enforced to protect Californians from the next preventable inferno.