In <i>Litwack v. Plaza Realty,</i> the plaintiff, a tenant in the defendant's apartment building, brought suit to recover for injuries allegedly sustained due to toxic mold in her apartment. When the plaintiff began to feel sick, her doctors recommended that she have her apartment environmentally tested and the presence of mold was confirmed. Months before the mold was discovered, the plaintiff had complained about a brown, wet spot in the middle of her dining room wall. A week later, the building's handyman opened the sheetrock and discovered a potential tiny crack in a steam pipe. When the steam was turned on months later, the crack was confirmed and a plumber was called in to repair the pipe. The plaintiff had also complained that her air conditioners dripped during the summer months. In response, building staff would change her filters from time to time. Based on these two incidents, the plaintiff claimed that the defendants were on notice of the mold. The Court of Appeals disagreed and held that the defendants did not have sufficient notice of the potential for mold growth.
<i>Litwack v. Plaza Realty Investors,</i> 208 WL 4700971 (N.Y.), 2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 08158