NAA Files Amicus Brief in Mold Case - LETS GET OUR FACTS STRAIGHT

2 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted

katytx

unread,
Sep 2, 2009, 10:54:19 PM9/2/09
to Toxic Indoor Mold Central
Great Job clearing up the NAA propaganda piece!
Message has been deleted

Moldleg333

unread,
Sep 3, 2009, 5:32:13 PM9/3/09
to Toxic Indoor Mold Central
A few comments. As far as “faulty science” and no “causal link”, this
is absurd. I possess several peer-reviewed papers that conclusively
show that mold and the mycotoxins it produces cause a wide variety of
health issues some of which are very serious. As far as junk science,
then the Sanford & Son's must be Dr. Jack Thrasher, Dr. Ritchie
Shoemaker, Dr. Gray, Dr. Schaller, Dr. Kilburn, Dr. Hooper, Dr. Yang,
Dr. Campbell, and the others who have dedicated themselves to come to
our rescue. With prominent and well-respected individuals as this,
the
only junk is what the NAA is shoveling.
It is quite simple to remedy this. Just take the NAA leadership, have
them live in a mold filled structure like we were forced to, and they
will see more clearly. The truth is, they know and we know. If ethics
and morals were the basis
for their reasoning, then there would be no argument. Their fight all
stems from money and the need to spend little and make as much as they
can. That is what drives these corrupt
actions and statements. No compassion or caring of others. You got to
wonder. Who is really diseased? Them or us. At least we care about
others and even while sick, reach out to help our fellow brothers and
sisters.


http://www.naahq.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?List=9d9bf7fe%2D13ea%...
9/1/2009
NAA Files Amicus Brief in Mold Case
On Aug. 31 NAA filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief in
an Arizona state appellate court. The brief sets forth legal and
public policy arguments that address litigation arising out of a
resident’s exposure to mold at an apartment community – specifically,
the dearth of scientific evidence supporting a causal link between
mold exposure and adverse health effects. Claims of physical injuries
attributed to the presence of mold in housing have been the basis for
an explosion of litigation over the past twenty years. In 2003, the
Insurance Information Institute estimated that 10,000 mold-related
suits were pending nationwide; a 300 percent increase since 1999.
Mold
litigation represents significant risks to providers of rental
housing
as evidenced by a recent jury award of $3.3 million to a plaintiff
who
blamed her illnesses on her exposure to mold in her rental home.
Litigation and judgment awards based on junk science harm the
apartment industry, and greatly increase the cost of housing for
residents.
The scientific studies, described in the amicus brief, debunk the
notion of a causative effect between the presence of mold and the
wide
ranging health-related damages claimed in these cases. In its brief,
NAA argues that because the plaintiffs base their claims on faulty
science, and it is generally accepted in the scientific community
that
no causal link between mold and poor health can be demonstrated, the
decision of the trial court dismissing the case should be affirmed on
legal and public policy grounds.
The case is Mason v. Eastside Apartments, Inc., et al. 1 CA-CV 09-155
and the appeal is pending before the Court of Appeals for the State
of
Arizona, Division One. For more information on this case, mold
litigation or how to apply for NAA amicus assistance, please contact
Michael Semko at 703.518.6141 ext. 111.
W. Michael Semko - Vice President, National Lease Program, National
Apartment Association


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages