Mold Suits Springing Up in Pa.

While the phrase “toxic mold” has been bandied about in the media, the actual toxicity of mold is questionable. According to the Centers for Disease Control, molds are “microscopic fungi that live on plant or animal matter.”

Currently, there are no standards that spell out what is an acceptable, tolerable or normal quantity of mold to have indoors.

There are thousands upon thousands of different kinds of molds. Most common indoors are Cladosporium, Penicillium, Alternaria and Aspergillus. Less common are molds such as Stachybotrys chartarum which contain mycotoxins, or airborne contaminants that, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, may cause ailments anywhere from short-term allergic irritation up to neurological problems.

The Stachybotrys chartarum is a green-black mold that grows best on material with a high cellulose and low nitrogen content, such as fiberboard, gypsum dry wall and paper.

The use of those kind of building materials has contributed to the surge of mold complaints, according to Ellison. Much construction today incorporates the use of wood as opposed to steel and stone.

“There’s food for the mold to grow,” said Ellison, referring the use of lumbar.

He also says the proliferation of the self-contained unit in construction adds to the mold problem. Many homes and buildings have central heat or air and once something like mold gets into the unit, it can spread throughout a building, Ellison said.

And the increase of this type of construction has lead to the spread of the mold-related litigation, awarding mold the title of the next asbestos.

While the fact that mold is an organism differentiates it from asbestos, a man-made product, Buchanan partner Little said mold has the “potential for catastrophic litigation.”

Heidi B. Goldstein of Thompson Hine in Ohio hosts seminars on mold and says although asbestos and mold are both indoor air contaminants, she doesn’t think mold is going to become the next asbestos.

For one thing, mold causes innocuous injuries, whereas asbestos causes lung cancer and asbestosis. Goldstein and Little concur that once mold is removed from an environment, an individual’s symptoms usually subside, whereas asbestos causes easily identifiable serious and permanent injuries.

Ellison said he thinks calling mold the next asbestos is “blowing things out of proportion.” He said asbestos was taken off the market years ago, signifying a specific end to the problem. Mold, however, is sometimes unavoidable.

Ellison also said asbestos lawsuits targeted major manufacturers and although the mold-related suits are affecting the construction industry, the number of suits hasn’t reached the magnitude of asbestos suits.

Taking Notice

The event that made the country take mold seriously came in June 2001 when a Texas jury awarded $32 million to a family whose home was damaged by mold. The award stemming from the bad faith suit, however, did not award any damages for bodily injury. A bulk of the award was in the form of punitive damages.

“It’s the event that has drawn everyone’s attention,” Ellison said.

In Congress, U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., recently introduced the U.S. Toxic Mold Safety and Protection Act, also known as the “Melinda Bill” after Texas plaintiff Melinda Ballard.

The bill would mandate research into mold growth, including the effects of mold on human health, and develop guidelines for preventing and removing mold. The bill would also create a National Toxic Mold Insurance Program administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency which is geared to protect homeowners from catastrophic losses.

The bill is in limbo right now until Congress reconvenes in the fall.

And here in Pennsylvania, before summer break, the Senate adopted a resolution urging the state Department of Health to develop a task force to investigate the health effects of toxic mold.

Growing Claims