Spray Foam Insulation Class Action Lawsuit

A New Jersey couple is currently pursuing their own class action lawsuit against a leading manufacturer of spray foam insulation that allegedly sells and installs improperly dangerous spray foam insulation in residences without telling customers that the products are dangerous or telling them that it might be dangerous for them to install the product in their homes. As I have written previously in my blog, the State of New Jersey prohibits the state’s residents from buying or installing any item that could potentially harm residents, so the law provides additional protection for spray foam insulation manufacturers as well. Unfortunately, the State of New Jersey did not get the message and continues to allow irresponsible manufacturers and contractors to sell products to New Jerseyans despite the fact that the products can be very dangerous if installed improperly or if there is a safety risk.

Spray Foam Insulation Class Action Lawsuit

As a result of the injuries sustained by the plaintiffs in this lawsuit, the manufacturer and contractor were instructed by the attorney to immediately remove the items from the residence, and they were instructed not to install the items in the future. The plaintiffs did not purchase the materials from the manufacturer or installer over the Internet or in person, but rather obtained the materials from the vendors via online catalogs. This act enabled the negligent contractors to continue selling potentially dangerous products to the defrauded residents of the residence without telling them that the products were dangerous and without informing the New Jersey residents that they had a duty to purchase the proper installation instructions and materials for the installation. The result of this conduct was that the residents of the home sustained injuries as a result of the installation process being performed improperly.

These results of the allegedly deceptive installation process became obvious once the mold testing was conducted and the mold testing was concluded and reported.

Unfortunately, during all of the litigation and all of the medical visits, the supposed nontoxic or safe material became inert once the mold tests were concluded and the mold analysis was performed. Because of this fact, many of the plaintiffs’ injuries did not become evident until several months after the injuries occurred, or if the medical condition of the plaintiffs deteriorates more quickly than expected. Due to the fact that the mold testing failed to detect the presence of the chemical that causes mold to become inert, there was no indication to the jury or the judge that the defendants violated any duty of care with respect to the safety and health of the residents of the apartment complex.

Also problematic is the manner in which the toxic chemicals are discharged into the environment during the installation process.

Plaintiffs contend that this conduct was designed to allow the defendants to avoid having to discharge the toxic chemicals into the environment during the construction process. Although some degree of environmental discharges from the manufacturers and plumbers during the construction of the apartment buildings may be unavoidable, it is clear from the record that these discharges are inconsistent with the style and design of many modern building construction projects, including those that involve spray foam insulation. Thus, there is a strong likelihood that the plaintiffs will receive a substantial judgment in their favor as a result of this lawsuit.

Another significant aspect of this lawsuit involves the plaintiffs’ claims that they have suffered a wide range of health problems as a direct result of the defendants’ negligence.

Among the most common conditions identified by plaintiffs are sinusitis, respiratory infections, headaches, asthma, shortness of breath, and other health problems. Because these problems are so widespread, and because the costs associated with treating them can be very expensive, the class action lawsuit is intended to provide long term financial relief to the plaintiffs. One of the benefits of this lawsuit is that homeowners who suffer from such conditions may receive monetary damages that reflect the direct costs associated with their treatment. These costs can include expert medical care, prescription medication, or alternative treatments for these conditions.

As noted above, there are two class action lawsuits currently pending in courts.

However, these cases differ from one another in a number of ways. In one case, the court cases are split between a group of plaintiffs seeking monetary damages for personal injuries, as opposed to a group of homeowners seeking damages only for injuries. In the other case, the multidistrict class action lawsuit, the court cases are divided between homeowners and/or their attorneys seeking damages for health problems only.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *