Pesticide application at adjacent business sickens plaintiff, results in claimed long-term injuries. $8M. Los Angeles County.

Facts and Background

• Facts and Background:

  On May 1, 2015, plaintiff Atlas Ferrera, 37, a makeup artist, was using the bathroom at work when he was allegedely engulfed in a cloud of smoke. When he went next door to the other business, he learned that a Terminix technician had recently completed a pest control application into a joint wall shared with the neighboring business that had been shut down due to a roach infestation. 

• Plaintiff's Contentions:

  That defendant negligently exposed plaintiff to toxic pesticides including pyrethrines, pyrethroids and noenicitinoids, that caused acute respiratory symptoms, complete loss of smell, complete loss of taste, and chronic migraines.

  Also, that Terminix failed to record what pesticides were applied, where, and how much, in violation of state law. That defendant claimed to have lost its own investigation report concerning the incident.

   

• Defendant's Contentions:

  Terminix denied Ferrera was exposed to anything and denied it was negligent. Terminix maintained at trial that it followed all applicable regulations and product manufacturer instructions and guidance.

  Terminix filed numerous motions in limine that plaintiff’s experts’ testimony was lacking in foundation and speculative based on the Supreme Court’s decision in  Sargon Enterprises v. USC. These motions were denied. Terminix’s expert witnesses testified that none of the components of the materials applied were capable of causing the permanent loss of smell or taste and that plaintiff’s claimed symptoms and findings on diagnostic tests were inconsistent and physiologically impossible.