Bennett Katz Presents New Indoor Environmental Toxins for Healthcare & Real Estate Management Community
MRSR, Staph, E-coli and Norovirus are some of the new toxins entering the litigation landscape.
2006

The New Indoor Environmental Toxins Conference, held at the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, brought together a distinguished panel of individuals, who each specialize in dealing with indoor environmental toxins and their effects. Sponsored by O&B, the conference included focused discussions on the developing legal landscape, the scientific make-up of "new pollutants," prevention of indoor environmental issues and the importance of procuring pollution and environmental insurance.

In his presentation entitled, The Litigation Landscape, O&B's Bennett Katz addressed the increasing number of lawsuits stemming from MRSA, staph infections and other indoor environmental pollutants. While the courts have been reluctant to find liability in these cases because these types of bacteria can exist in the absence of negligence (Chavous v. Richmond Co. Hospital Authority, 313 S.E.2d 492 Ga. App. 1984), Bennett's presentation cited recent decisions impacting this type of litigation.

Here's a recap of key points:

MRSA Breaks Into the Mainstream

• While MRSA (Methicillin Resistant Staph Aureus) was known to exist in hospitals for years, outbreaks in other locations were rare until the 1990s. At that time, infections were confined to individuals with weak immune systems such as the elderly and small children.
• According to the CDC, infection rates for MRSA and staph related bacteria have doubled in cities such as Atlanta and Baltimore since 2002. There have been recent outbreaks in schools, gyms and prisons.

Recent Case Law

During his presentation, Bennett cited several cases which support the use of expert testimony: Daubert in Federal Court, Frye in New York State Court, the September 2006 Fraser decision and the October 2006 Parker decision.

• The Fraser court reviewed the body of scientific literature and heard expert testimony before precluding plaintiff's expert from testifying that mold causes injury. Link to Fraser v. 301-52 Townhouse Corp decision
• In the Parker decision ( Parker v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2006 NY Slip Op 7391), the Court of Appeals determined that in toxic exposure cases, a plaintiff's expert must also provide evidence proving that the level or degree to which the plaintiff was exposed to the toxic chemical has been shown to cause injuries similar to those suffered by the plaintiff. Link to the Parker decisions

Helpful Tips

Here are some tips for safeguarding your facility from liability: