Historic $394.4 Million Jury Verdict Secured by Jenner & Block for Consumers Energy and DTE Electric

Breaking: Jenner & Block Secures Landmark $394,424,138 Verdict for Consumers Energy and DTE Electric

On December 18, a jury delivered a landmark verdict totaling $394,424,138 in favor of Consumers Energy Company and DTE Electric Company in a civil matter, with Jenner & Block representing the utilities.

Industry observers describe the decision as a watershed moment for utility litigation, underscoring the high stakes involved in energy-related claims and accountability.

What the verdict means

The amount signals the potential scale of damages in energy-sector disputes and could influence how utilities evaluate legal risk, insurance coverage, and corporate governance in future matters.

what happened, in brief

Court filings indicate a lengthy legal process culminating in a jury decision in favor of the two utilities.The verdict stands as a notable milestone in the ongoing effort to resolve this dispute through civil litigation.

Key facts

Fact	Details
Parties	Consumers Energy Company; DTE Electric Company
Verdict	$394,424,138
Date	December 18
Selected counsel	Jenner & Block
Case Type	Civil litigation
Jurisdiction	Not disclosed

Long-term perspectives

Long-term, such verdicts can shape risk management and financial planning for utilities. They may influence how companies guard against litigation, price protection, and regulatory engagement with customers. As courts weigh complex claims in the energy sector, juries may become a more frequent channel for accountability in infrastructure and service delivery.

For context, energy policy and corporate governance considerations intersect with large civil verdicts. Readers seeking deeper background can consult authoritative resources such as the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

U.S. Department of Energy • U.S. Securities and Exchange commission

Engagement

What impact do you think this verdict will have on customer bills and utility reliability?

Should regulators adjust oversight in response to major verdicts? Share your perspective below.

Share this news and join the discussion with your thoughts and comments.

For a stay of any settlement talks to preserve the full verdict amount. Ensured that the $394.4 M award remained enforceable against both utilities.

---

Case Overview: $394.4 Million Jury Verdict for Consumers Energy & DTE Electric

• Plaintiffs: Residential and commercial ratepayers in Michigan
• Defendants: Consumers Energy Co.and DTE Energy Co. (now DTE Electric)
• Law Firm: Jenner & Block LLP – lead counsel for the plaintiffs
• Verdict Amount: $394.4 million (record‑setting for utility litigation in the midwest)
• Date of Verdict: 2024 October 22 (final jury award affirmed in 2025)

The verdict stemmed from allegations that both utilities knowingly over‑charged customers and failed to disclose costly infrastructure deficiencies, violating Michigan’s Public Utility Act and consumer protection statutes.

---

Core Legal Issues That Drove the Verdict

1. rate‑setting violations – Utilities allegedly submitted inflated cost projections to the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC).
2. Misrepresentation of grid reliability – Internal emails showed executives where aware of recurring outages but downplayed the risk in public filings.
3. Environmental compliance shortcuts – Evidence revealed improper handling of coal‑ash waste, leading to groundwater contamination claims.

Each issue was tied to specific statutory breaches, including MCL 284.1620 (utility rate abuse) and MCL 750.5170 (consumer fraud).

---

Jenner & Block’s litigation Blueprint

Phase	Action	Impact
1.Data Collection	Secured over 1,200 internal memos, engineering reports, and 900+ billing records through discovery subpoenas.	Built a factual matrix that quantified over‑billing by an average of 12 % per customer.
2. Expert Testimony	Retained independent cost‑accounting experts, a grid reliability analyst, and an environmental scientist.	Provided credibility to claims of systemic mismanagement and environmental negligence.
3. Class Certification	Filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3), emphasizing commonality of rate‑impact and injury.	Secured a class of 2.3 million Michigan ratepayers, amplifying damages potential.
4. Jury Narrative	Crafted a story around “protecting everyday Michigan families from corporate greed.”	Engaged jurors emotionally while grounding arguments in documented facts.
5. Post‑Verdict Enforcement	Filed a motion for a stay of any settlement talks to preserve the full verdict amount.	Ensured that the $394.4 M award remained enforceable against both utilities.

---

Key Facts That Influenced the Jury

• Over‑billing calculations: Internal cost models showed a $1.8 billion over‑charge over five years,of which $300 million was directly attributable to Consumers Energy.
• Outage frequency: data logs revealed a 28 % increase in unplanned outages between 2019‑2023, contradicting the utilities’ public reliability reports.
• environmental impact: Soil testing near the Muskegon coal‑ash pond detected lead levels 4× above EPA limits, linking utility practices to health risks.

These concrete figures translated into $94 million for Consumers Energy and $300.4 million for DTE Electric in the final award.

---

Immediate Benefits for Plaintiffs

• Compensation pool: Each class member receives a pro rata share, averaging $171 per household after legal fees.
• Future rate protection: The judgment includes a binding injunction requiring the MPSC to review and adjust future rate schedules within 90 days of any major capital project.
• Environmental remediation funding: $45 million earmarked for cleanup of the Muskegon site, overseen by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes & Energy (EGLE).

---

Practical Tips for Attorneys Handling Large‑Scale Utility Litigation

1. Start wiht granular financial analysis

• Use forensic accountants early to isolate over‑billing components.
• Leverage digital discovery tools
• AI‑driven document review can flag relevant communications faster than manual sorting.
• Secure credible experts
• Choose professionals with prior testimony before the MPSC or similar regulatory bodies.
• Build a class‑wide narrative
• Highlight how the alleged conduct affects everyday life—energy bills, reliability, health.
• Plan for post‑verdict enforcement
• Draft attachment orders and lien strategies before the verdict to protect the award.

---

Comparative Case Studies

Verdict	Utility	Year	Core Issue	Verdict Amount
$339 M	Pacific Gas & electric (PG&E)	2022	Wildfire negligence	$339 million
$280 M	Southern Company	2023	Coal‑ash contamination	$280 million
$400 M (pending)	Enel USA	2025	Grid cyber‑security breach	$400 million (pre‑judgment)

These cases illustrate a growing trend: high‑stakes liability for utilities that fail to meet regulatory, safety, and transparency standards.

---

frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q1. What does the $394.4 million verdict mean for future utility rate cases in Michigan?

A. It sets a binding precedent that the MPSC can be held accountable for approving rates based on inaccurate data, encouraging stricter scrutiny of utility cost proposals.

Q2. Can Consumers Energy or DTE Electric appeal the verdict?

A. Both companies filed appeals on procedural grounds in early 2025; however, the appellate court affirmed the verdict in September 2025, confirming the award’s enforceability.

Q3. How are attorneys’ fees calculated in a class action of this size?

A. Under MCL 600.1110, fees are typically 30 % of the net recovery after subtracting costs, yielding an estimated $118 million in attorney fees for this case.

Q4. Will the verdict affect upcoming infrastructure projects?

A. Yes—any new project now requires an independent third‑party cost audit before MPSC approval, a direct result of the court’s injunctive relief.

Q5. How can affected ratepayers claim their share of the settlement?

A. Claimants must submit a validated claim form through the official class portal (www.consumersenergyclass2024.com) by 2026 April 30 to receive their distribution.

---

Actionable Takeaways for Stakeholders

• Ratepayers: Review the official claim portal now; verify address and billing information to avoid delayed payments.
• Utility Executives: Conduct an internal audit of rate‑setting practices and file corrective disclosures with the MPSC within 90 days.
• Environmental Advocates: Monitor EGLE’s remediation schedule for the Muskegon site; the $45 M fund is allocated for a five‑year cleanup plan.
• Legal Professionals: Incorporate data‑driven storytelling and early expert involvement into the litigation roadmap for any utility‑related class action.

---