PHILADELPHIA – A lawsuit involving a father-daughter pair of plaintiffs from the Germantown neighborhood of Philadelphia suing their property owner and manager for alleged exposure to both mold and insecticides in their apartment, has been slated for a settlement conference next summer.
A case management order issued by Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Judge John M. Younge on Nov. 7 directed that a settlement conference would be able to be scheduled subsequent to June 3. Before that time, all counsel will file detailed pre-trial documentation prior to that same date. A pre-trial conference will be available for any date after Aug. 5, 2019, with an anticipated trial date of Sept. 2, 2019.
Marcos Mercado and Sincere Taylor of Philadelphia initially filed suit in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on June 25 versus APM Properties, Inc. and Refugio De Amor Limited (doing business as “Hogar De”), also of Philadelphia.
The lawsuit says the plaintiffs were residents of a premises located on Germantown Avenue and on Sept. 18, 2017, they experienced “severe respiratory issues” as a result of mold, mildew and exposure to environmental insecticides in their apartment – due to the defendants’ alleged failure to properly inspect, maintain and correct the dangers found on the premises.
“Mr. Mercado suffered various serious and permanent personal injuries, including but not limited to the following: Exposure to pesticide, frequent headaches, depression and/or anxiety, exacerbated asthma, respiratory symptoms, change in immune status and pulmonary issues all to Mr. Mercado’s great loss and detriment. Sincere suffered various serious and permanent personal injuries, including but not limited to the following: Exacerbated asthma and respiratory symptoms,” the suit reads.
The defendants answered the complaint on Sept. 21, arguing it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, denying they were guilty of any negligence, and asserting a long list of defenses.
These included: “accord and satisfaction, arbitration and award, assumption of risk, contributory negligence, discharge in bankruptcy, duress, estoppel, failure of consideration, fraud, illegality, injury by fellow servant, laches, license, payment, release, res judicata, repose, statute of frauds, statute of limitations, waiver, improper venue, the worker’s compensation bar, the Pennsylvania Financial Responsibility Act and the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act.”
In a reply to the defendants’ new matter submitted on Oct. 11, the plaintiffs categorically denied all of the new matter arguments and demanded strict proof of them at trial, if relevant.
For a lone count of negligence, the plaintiffs are seeking damages in excess of $50,000, plus delay damages, costs and any other damages permitted by the Court.
The plaintiffs are represented by Gary L. Bailey Jr. of Bailey & Associates, in Philadelphia.
The defendants are represented by Zhanna Dubinsky and Robert J. Cosgrove of Wade Clark Mulcahy, also in Philadelphia.
Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 180603017
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at email@example.com