Attorney obtained a defense verdict in a toxic exposure claim brought against a pest control company

Attorney obtained a defense verdict in a toxic exposure claim brought against a pest control company. The plaintiff in the case requested that our client perform a termite treatment on her house. She claimed that she informed the pest control company's salesman that she was very sensitive to chemicals and that she was assured that only the safest chemical would be used. Upon returning to the house after the treatment, plaintiff claimed that she sustained shortness of breath, burning eyes and developed a rash on her skin. In addition to a toxicologist, an occupational and environmental physician and a pest control expert, plaintiff called a doctor from Duke Medical School, a neurobiologist who was offered as one of the world's leading experts on the effects of pesticide exposure. The doctor testified that the symptoms that the plaintiff complained of and which she claims to continue to have, including neurocognitive difficulties, were caused by organophosphate pesticide poisoning. In defense of our client, the attorney offered evidence that only one termidicide was used in the plaintiff's house as opposed to the 3 chemicals that plaintiff claimed were used by our client. Additionally, the attorney called an expert in the field of pest control practices who testified that our client acted within the applicable standard of care as well as an occupational medicine physician from a prominent local university who testified that any exposure that the plaintiff may have sustained was short in duration and that there were no ongoing cognitive or physical consequences of the exposure. The trial lasted for 5 days and the jury came back with a no-negligence verdict after 2 ½ hours of deliberation.