Four years ago, in Fraser v. 301-52 Townhouse,1 the Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed dismissal of a personal injury claim in a case involving injuries allegedly arising out of exposure to toxic mold after finding that the plaintiff’s submissions failed to raise a triable issue of fact that mold exposure caused adverse health effects. In Fraser, the court essentially proclaimed that the body of science and medical literature existing in 2008 did not find general acceptance for the proposition that exposure to mold caused physical injury.
Since then, so-called “toxic mold” litigation, which was considered by many as the “next asbestos,” has all but dried up, most likely due to the evidentiary hurdle created by Fraser.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
