This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
How to Handle a


Sick Building Case (Continued from page 13)


ten listed on service records. For that rea- son, all maintenance and repair logs, and mechanical and service records for the HVAC system should be requested and reviewed.


Identification of Contaminants Counsel must also establish that as a


result of the defendant’s negligence, build- ing occupants were exposed to harmful levels of contaminants. That is often dif- ficult to do as the conditions responsible for occupant illness vary from building to building and are often difficult to iden-


tify. Causation may be especially elusive when there is no single episode or toxic exposure that precipitates an acute reac- tion in building occupants. Inadequate ventilation, renovations,


and microbial infestations are among the most common causes of sick building syn- drome. In the early 1990s, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health reported that building ventilation had been found to be inadequate in a majority of the buildings in which it had conducted indoor air quality investiga- tions. In some instances, building activities such as renovations involving the use of organic solvents in products such as paints and glues result in the release of volatile organic compounds, thereby in- creasing a building’s “chemical load” to





 


 


  





Sussman & Levine, L.L.C. 





 





 


Van Grack, Axelson & Williamowsky 


 


 





Law Office of Barry R. Glazer 


 Joseph H. Ostad, P.A.


 





Gordon, Feinblatt, Rothman, HoffBerger & Hollander 


unhealthy levels. More recently, attention has increasingly focused upon the growth of potentially poisonous or allergy-pro- ducing concentrations of molds and fungi that are frequently found in offices and homes with severe water damage or chronic moisture problems. Often times, a number of these processes are at work in a single building, creating a “chemical soup” that, over time, leads to the chronic health problems complained of by build- ing occupants.


An industrial hygienist can often sug-


gest environmental tests that should be conducted in the building that will iden- tify sources of contamination. Such tests may measure the level of outdoor air in- troduced into the building, the volume of air circulated by the ventilation system, the nature and extent of air distribution within the building, the level of carbon dioxide and other chemicals in the air, and indoor concentrations of fungi and bac- teria.


The industrial hygienist will usually not obtain access to the building to con- duct environmental testing until after suit has been filed, which may occur months or even years after conditions in the build- ing have begun to make occupants ill. Therefore, as a result of intervening remediation efforts or other changes in the building environment, the conditions that caused building occupants to become ill may no longer exist and may not be de- tected at the time of that subsequent environmental testing. Even if environmental testing detects unhealthy levels of contaminants, their relevance may be challenged by the de- fendants unless the plaintiffs can establish that the conditions found during testing also existed at the time the plaintiffs be- came ill. For that reason, discovery concerning intervening changes in the building environment, or the absence of changes, is important. Discovery should also be directed to determining whether the building owner or public health au- thorities conducted environmental testing at the time the claimants became ill, as sometimes occurs in response to health complaints made by building occupants.


Causation Proving that contaminants in a build-


ing have caused a plaintiff’s illness is a two-step process. First, the plaintiff must establish that his exposure to such con- taminants can cause the illness from which he suffers. That is sometimes referred to as general causation. Specific causation is then established by testimony that that exposure has caused the plaintiff’s illness.


14 Trial Reporter Winter 2001


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48