Page 14 - nov-dec2017.indd
P. 14
State Supreme Court Denies Summary
Judgment on Certain Duty of Care Issues
in Lawsuit Arising Out Of Fatal Carbon
Monoxide Exposure Incident
n June 2017, the Idaho reviewed below addresses Property Management in
Supreme Court denied duty of care issues between March 2010. About a year or
summary judgment on duty the apartment association and so later, in early 2011, tenants
Iof care issues in the wrongful the property management started reporting concerns
death and personal injury company as far as warnings, about smelling gas/odors inside
case of Forbush v Sagecrest installation of carbon monoxide apartment units.
Multi Family Property Owners detectors and maintenance Intermountain Gas was
Association, Inc. In the of the water heaters after the contacted about the concerns
underlying incident a young carbon monoxide issue was and determined that carbon
Marine died and his girlfriend discovered, the case provides monoxide levels were high in
was seriously injured due to insight for gas companies as some units due to issues with
carbon monoxide exposure to risk management issues, water heater venting systems.
while they were overnight including following training and The apartment complex had
guests in an apartment unit. procedures as far as gas-fueled two types of water heaters;
Allegations in the lawsuit appliances. one type had metal screens
include that defendants knew around the bottom of the tank;
there were high levels of Background/Underlying the second type had only a
carbon monoxide emissions Incident. partial screen and was prone
in multiple units due to issues The apartment complex to clogging which could lead
with the water heaters but at issue had forty-eight to the emission of carbon
did not take any action or separate buildings with four monoxide. After the property
suffi cient action to protect the apartments in each building. management company met
occupants. The apartment A property owners’ association with Intermountain Gas, they
unit at issue was part of a (POA) was responsible for made the decision that things
large apartment complex with maintaining the grounds would be fi ne if they simply
multiple layers of property and the unit owners were had someone clean/vacuum
oversight and control as far as responsible for maintaining the water heater screens.
inspections, maintenance and the interior of the apartments. However, concerns continued
repairs. A local gas company Both the POA and the unit to grow about carbon
that conducted inspections owners were required by monoxide emissions and in
and analysis of the carbon the property covenants, July 2011 Intermountain Gas
monoxide emission problems conditions and restrictions was contacted again after a
with the heating systems in the to use the same property tenant reported smelling gas.
apartments was sued along management company. Intermountain Gas checked
with a number of other parties. The two groups entered into the unit, “described the carbon
Although the decision a contract with First Rate monoxide level as deadly and
14 Alabama Propane Gas Association | November/December 2017
