|
Contracts and Claims
Timely articles covering the most
pressing issues facing construction firms in the Midwest
Los Angeles Jury Returns
Defense Verdict in Mold Bodily Injury Case
Court Rejects Claims Homeowner
Injured From Exposure to Mold
LOS ANGELES, CA August 1, 2005 --
Following a six week trial, a Los Angeles jury
returned a defense verdict in a closely watched case involving
claims of bodily
injury from exposure to mold in a single family residence
located in West Covina,
California.
Plaintiff Dr. Sannette Gite claimed she was injured as a result
of exposure to mold in
her home which caused her to flee the 5,200 square foot
residence without any of her
personal belongings. In particular, Dr. Gite claimed a myriad of
physical ailments
from the alleged microbial exposure including permanent brain
damage, upper and
lower respiratory problems, lung incapacity, voice impairment,
low white blood cell
count, dizziness, lethargy, shortness of breath,
gastrointestinal problems, bloating,
diarrhea, angina, hair loss, headaches, memory loss, stuttering,
rashes and skin
discoloration. She blamed Home Depot and its trade contractor
for the mold growth
which purportedly was caused by water which entered through the
threshold of
French doors installed in the family room of her home.
Claiming she was injured from exposure to mold, Gite abandoned
her home and
moved into a Beverly Hills hotel where she resided over the past
two years and
throughout the trial. Property allegedly left behind in the
home, which went into
foreclosure, included a chinchilla coat valued at $100,000,
recording studio
equipment together with all of her furniture, clothing and
personal effects.
Claiming all personal property had been subjected to microbial
contamination and
was incapable of cleaning, Gite made a settlement demand prior
to trial for $26
million. This included her claim for future loss of earnings due
to her alleged
inability to ever work again.
Despite the presence of stachybotrys, penicillium/aspergillus
and a host of other molds,
the defense successfully established the absence of any
negligence.
During the course of the trial, Judge Cesar Sarmiento allowed
all plaintiff medical
experts to testify over vigorous objections that the testimony
lacked foundation and
was based on testing methodologies generally not acceptable
under the Kelly-Frye
doctrine. During trial, Dr. Gite lowered her settlement demand
to one million. In
closing arguments, plaintiff counsel simply asked the jury to
award whatever they
thought was reasonable in view of the circumstances. Ultimately,
the jury awarded
plaintiff nothing.
"Jurors commented about the depth of work up on defenses to the
property damage
and bodily injury claims" said trial attorney Victoria Ersoff.
Ms. Ersoff, a partner in
the Los Angeles office of Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman stated
that "even when
all testimony comes into evidence, juries are able to separate
the hype related to
mold claims from reality."
Home Depot, represented by Ersoff, was dismissed from the case
on the eve of trial
for a waiver of fees and costs. Ersoff then associated with
Russell Franklin with the
Schaefer Lax firm to defend the sole remaining defendant at
trial. West Hollywood
lawyer Brian Witzer represented Dr. Gite at trial. For Ersoff,
this is her second
defense verdict in a mold bodily injury lawsuit in the last nine
months.
<< Back to articles
|
