All of the records noted below are in response for subpoenaed documents for the year 2005 and the three preceeding years. As evidenced, there was testing for mold in apartments in the complex in the year 2007. However, the information requested and regarding testing in 2005 and the prior years before the apartment was leased to us, was never answered or evidenced in response of the subpeoned documents.
The below documents show Guarantee Service Team of Professionals were cleaning out air ducts & dryer vents. Air Environmental was the testing company management used to test our apartment & used again when the complex was sold in 2007. ODDLY, BOTH SENT RECORDS FOR THE WRONG YEARS. WITH REGARD TO STATMENTS THAT NO PRIOR TESTING FOR MOLD HAD BEEN PERFORMED IN 2002 TO 2005, THE IRRELEVANT DOCUMENTATION OF TESTING DONE IN 2007 WAS ACCEPTED, NO QUESTIONS ASKED, BY OUR ATTORNEY.
Not only were the wrong records sent by Air Environmental Services, Inc., AGAIN, for testing done years after we were there; Mr. Chip Pierrotti – the registered agent subpoenaed to appear, notified our attorney by letter that he was ill and could not appear. BY NOT APPEARING, OUR ATTORNEY DID NOT HAVE TO ASK THE QUESTION – WHY DID YOU BRING RECORDS FOR 2007 AND NOT 2005 AND THE PRECEEDING 3 YEARS? Mr. Pierrotti’s deposition was never rescheduled to be able to obtain the needed information of what management knew of mold infestations prior to leasing us the apartment.
Guarantee Service Team of Professionals sent some invoices for ‘obsessive air duct and dryer vent cleaning’ that included records for 2004 – 2007. AGAIN, THE WRONG YEARS. Records after 2005 were not requested. I do know that another company was used to perfom services of this type like the one in the picture below that I took when we were still in the apartment maybe they thought it would be better if we did not see Guarantee out cleaning vents again. Deal’s also clean ducts.
Our attorney and Guarantee Service Team of Professionals went a step further to make it appear as if Guarantee Service Team of Professionals had not done any cleaning in our apartment. Our attorney sent an affidavit to GUARANTEE GIRLS (a sister company to Guarantee Service Team of Professionals) to sign saying they had never done any work in our apartment. THEY DIDN’T, GUARANTEE SERVICE TEAM OF PROFESSIONALS DID. Plaintiff’s Attorney Subpoenas wrong Company – No Evidence
This was our attorney’s response when asked about this and records for the wrong years – “…unable to ascertain what your exact concerns are with the Guarantee Girls affidavit and the Guarantee Service Team of Professionals subpoenaed records. We have records dating from 2004 through 2007 for Guarantee Service Team of Professionals.”
IT IS VERY CLEAR TO ME NO ONE WANTED TO PRODUCE RECORDS FOR 2005 AND THE PRECEEDING 3 YEARS AND VERY CLEAR OUR ATTORNEY, J ARTHUR SMITH III DID NOT WANT TO RECEIVE THEM.
Our attorney did not subpoena records for any other mold testing companies.
Riverstone Residential sent ‘some’ maintenance records from 1995 – 2005, that show years of leaks in the apartment we were in. They even went an extra step and tossed in maintenance records dated from the time we moved out until six months later. It looks as if they are trying to show that nothing really had to be done to the apartment after we moved out, like VENT CLEANING, etc. Records for the time after we moved out were not in the supeona (not that the correct records were being sent by anyone) but what these records don’t show is that they forgot to include having all the carpet replaced because it was so wet and sticky from all the mold coming from the vents. I drove through the complex and saw the carpet in the parking lot. Perhaps if they forgot to include changing the carpet in the records,perhaps they forgot to include the air vent cleaning that would have had to be done since it had grown so thick in the four months we were there.
…from the failure to proffer necessary documents. It is well known that the opponent to a summary judgment motion must offer admissible proof that a question of fact exists. The opponent of a motion to dismiss an auto case for lack of serious physical injury must offer the affidavit of a physician, and that affidavit must set forth some objective proofs of the injury.
…the failure to sue a specific individual, the failure to add certain claims to the complaint, the choice of witnesses, the choice of evidence to include on a motion or at trial, the failures of discovery, investigation questions at deposition…
Information on Riverstone Residential, the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency, and the owners of Toxic Mold Infested Jefferson Lakes Apartments in Baton Rouge, Louisiana continuing to allow tenants to be exposed to extreme amounts of mold toxins
Political Action Committee – National Apartment Association (NAA) files Amicus Brief in mold case (two infant deaths in mold filled apt – Wasatch Prop Mgmt) citing US Chamber/ACOEM ‘litigation defense report’ to disclaim health effects of indoor mold & limit financial risk for industry
“Changes in construction methods have caused US buildings to become perfect petri dishes for mold and bacteria to flourish when water is added. Instead of warning the public and teaching physicians that the buildings were causing illness; in 2003 the US Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform, a think-tank, and a workers comp physician trade organization mass marketed an unscientific nonsequitor to the courts to disclaim the adverse health effects to stave off liability for financial stakeholders of moldy buildings. Although publicly exposed many times over the years, the deceit lingers in US courts to this very day.” Sharon Noonan Kramer