Napa Valley winery sued after worker allegedly started wildfire that destroyed harvests

Nearly a dozen Napa Valley wineries and grape growers are suing a luxury winery, its owner and a contractor over the 2025 Pickett Fire wildfire that allegedly destroyed their grape harvests and caused around $90 million losses.San Diego-based fire litigation firm, Singleton Schreiber, filed the lawsuit last week in Napa County Superior Court. The suit names Hundred Acre Winery, owner Jayson Woodbridge and independent contractor Juan Luis Gutierrez Marfil as defendants, as the fire started at the property. The nearly dozen plaintiffs that are seeking damages and a jury trial include Robert Foley Vineyards, Jackson Family Wines and Neal Family Vineyards, the San Francisco Chronicle reports.The lawsuit follows criminal charges filed against Marfil in August. He faces one felony count of recklessly causing a fire to a structure and forest. Marfil "admitted to Cal Fire Law Enforcement" that he disposed of "hot ashes into a burn pile, which caused the Pickett Fire,” according to charging documents cited by the outlet. He has pleaded not guilty, according to Napa Valley Features.Marfil pleaded not guilty at his September arraignment. Neither Woodbridge nor Hundred Acre has faced criminal charges.Nearly a dozen Napa Valley wineries and grape growers are suing Hundred Acre Winery, its owner and a contractor over a 2025 wildfire that started on the property and allegedly caused $90 million in losses (AFP/Getty)The Pickett Fire ignited August 21, 2025, at Hundred Acre's property in Calistoga, burning 6,800 acres. A preliminary Napa County assessment estimated at least $65 million in agricultural damage, affecting nearly 1,500 acres, or more than 3 percent of Napa Valley farmland.The lawsuit argues the damage extended beyond burned land and vines. Smoke allegedly contaminated grapes across the region, wiping out the 2025 harvest for numerous wineries and growers, particularly in the Howell Mountain wine region.Smoke taint occurs when compounds from wildfire smoke penetrate grapes, creating unpleasant flavors in finished wine. High-end wineries often avoid using smoke-tainted grapes to protect their reputations.The complaint says smoke "which persisted for days after the fire had been extinguished," caused significant financial losses and damaged the wineries' brands and market share."Because (they) were prevented from releasing a 2025 vintage, consumers assume the winery is floundering or in decline," the lawsuit states. "It will take years to rebuild the pre-fire goodwill and market share of (their) businesses."Hundred Acre spokesperson Sam Singer disputed the claims."Based on our review of the evidence, they sustained little or no smoke damage to support their claims," Singer told the SF Chronicle about the plaintiffs' grapes.Singer said the winery "categorically denies the allegations in the lawsuit," calling it "an economic ploy from vintners who are struggling with the decline in demand and consumption."The lawsuit also alleges Woodbridge directed workers to burn debris on the property ahead of a planned wedding. He allegedly instructed an employee to "pile up and ignite combustible debris" collected by Marfil to "ensure (the property) looked nice for the wedding guests,” according to the complaint. When the employee refused, Woodbridge allegedly directed Marfil to do it instead.The lawsuit follows August criminal charges against contractor Juan Luis Gutierrez Marfil, who allegedly admitted to improperly disposing of hot ashes that sparked the fire (Getty)Marfil then used hot ashes from a recently-tempered fireplace to ignite the debris pile, the lawsuit alleges. Cal Fire had suspended residential burn permits because of weather conditions.The lawsuit also argues that commercial weddings are generally prohibited at Napa County wineries and that Woodbridge "did not possess a special permit" to host one.Hundred Acre maintains the event was private."The gathering was a private party for staff and family on private property," Singer said Monday. "Napa County issued no citation against Hundred Acre or Woodbridge concerning that gathering."The complaint also argues Woodbridge "knew, firsthand, the acute fire risk" because his property was damaged in the 2020 Glass Fire. Woodbridge sued Napa County in 2022, arguing regulations requiring him to replant trees after that fire would increase wildfire risks.Woodbridge previously settled with PlumpJack Group, co-founded by California Governor Gavin Newsom, after the company lost 60 of its 129 acres of vines at its Oso Vineyard. Three other wine companies, including Outpost Wines, also sued Woodbridge in early August after settlement negotiations failed.Singleton Schreiber attorney Paul Starita previously told the SF Chronicle that Marfil's criminal charge would not change the firm's legal strategy against Woodbridge."The fire started on their property by a contractor that they hired," he said.Singer said Hundred Acre plans to fight the lawsuit. "We will not be pressured into paying claims we believe lack merit,” he told the outlet. The Independent has contacted Singleton Schreiber, for the plaintiffs, and Singer, representing the defendants, for comment.