Denver should fight DIA mold suit

[Guest guest]

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_2093541,00.html

Denver should fight DIA mold suit July 9, 2003 Mold has forever been everywhere, including in the air, and is generally harmless. Put "toxic" in front of it, though, and it can breed really vile and disgusting things . . . like bounty-hunting lawyers. So-called toxic mold is the hot new offense preferred by big-time personal injury attorneys now that competition in asbestos and tobacco litigation has become so fierce. They need additional targets with deep pockets until lawsuits against fast-food companies come into their own. Mold suits, practically nonexistent until five years ago, have sprung up in coastal states like Texas, Louisiana and California, where the humidity is a lot higher and mold more common than in Colorado. The case that got the trial bar's attention was a $32 million jury verdict in 2001, recovered by the owner of a Texas mansion from his insurance company after it refused to pay for a hardwood floor that had buckled because of a plumbing leak. "Dangerous mold" had also developed, said the complaint, but the plaintiff recovered that astounding amount even though the health claims were dismissed before trial. That case has put a crimp in home sales in Texas, where mold claims have multiplied and insurance companies are scrambling to put mold damage exclusions in their policies. Now a major "toxic mold" case has come to Colorado. A Chicago firm that specializes in this tort has combined with local lawyers to file suit against Denver International Airport and the city on behalf of two airline employees who have allegedly suffered from the effects of mold, mostly in DIA's Concourse B. Mold in Mile High (and dry) Denver? The suit sounds like the result of a bet made at the sauna in some downtown athletic club frequented by attorneys: "I bet I can win a mold case even in Denver." "No you can't . . ." The beauty of this one is that unlike most mold claims, it's filed as a class action suit. That multiplies the possible award. Expect to see ads sometime soon soliciting the participation of anyone who's walked down Concourse B a few times in recent years and hasn't felt all that well. Why not join the thousands signing up? You might end up getting your 65 cents, and never mind that the contingent-fee attorneys will reap millions. The plaintiffs' lawyers perhaps are counting on frightening the city attorney's office into folding its (and DIA's) tent and offering a generous settlement rather than take its chances with an impressionable and unpredictable jury. But we hope the city resists any temptation to settle. The nation can't afford to have a large class-action precedent in a mold case. In the first place, there's no such thing as "toxic" mold, according to Rice, a Colorado State University professor who specializes in mold. At worst mold is toxigenic, meaning it can produce toxins. But "toxic" has a scarier ring and lawyers use it to elevate public panic. Mold does exist almost everywhere, so it probably inhabits DIA. Rice claims he can even smell it there. But that doesn't necessarily mean it causes poor health. There is little scientific evidence connecting the presence of mold to infections, toxic responses or disease. It's a suit worth fighting.