It was not all that long ago that mold was seen as “the next asbestos”: an issue that could drive large amounts of litigation with substantial damages. As medical and scientific evidence began to pile up, and a few early high-profile cases resulted in significant judgments and large settlements, it seemed increasingly likely that that would be the case. But while mold is still a presence on the legal landscape, it has not been the blockbuster issue that some informed observers had predicted. Partly that has been the result of a coordinated effort by the EPA to develop standard guidelines for mold clean-up, and partly it has been the result of an insurance industry that has moved quickly to exclude or reduce coverage for mold claims in most policies.
But mold is still a significant concern for homeowners, and a potentially costly liability for contractors. It is well-established that mold is an allergen and can result in allergic reactions or respiratory complications, particularly in sensitive individuals. There is still a significant amount of controversy and debate about the more debilitating health effects of “toxic” molds. Accordingly, the health aspects of mold litigation remain an unpredictable and worrisome element for defendants in mold cases.