A federal magistrate judge ordered Hyatt Hotels to disclose the names and contact information of guests who were present at the Hyatt Place Boulder during a 2018 carbon monoxide poisoning, believing they could provide relevant information for a multimillion-dollar liability lawsuit.

However, Hyatt quickly succeeded in getting a district court judge to halt compliance with the order until he evaluates the hotel operator’s objections to disclosing the names of its guests.

The proposed class action lawsuit from Raymond and Bettyjune Clark alleges negligence and violations of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act by Hyatt and several of its related entities. The Clarks claim that a faulty boiler and ventilation system at the Hyatt Place Boulder/Pearl Street hotel poisoned them during their November 2018 stay.

Reportedly, Bettyjune Clark passed out in the lobby, requiring a trip to the emergency department. When the Clarks returned to the hotel and continued to feel disoriented and light-headed, they bought a carbon monoxide alarm. The device sounded “immediately” after they plugged it in. The Clarks alleged that Hyatt personnel were indifferent to the report of carbon monoxide, and it was an emergency department physician who ultimately called the fire department.

The Daily Camera reported at the time of the hotel’s evacuation that firefighters measured carbon monoxide levels of up to 200 parts per million in some hotel rooms, and 500 ppm in the boiler room. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission advises that levels above 70 ppm can produce noticeable symptoms, while sustained exposure to concentrations above 150 ppm may result in unconsciousness or even death.

The Clarks sought to force Hyatt to disclose the names and contact information of guests from around the time of the Nov. 18, 2018 evacuation. They argued the other guests were potential witnesses who could speak to their own symptoms, recall hearing the Clarks’ carbon monoxide detector sound off, or corroborate the hotel’s alleged lack of notice to patrons about a carbon monoxide danger.

U.S. Magistrate Judge S. Kato Crews found the request reasonable and ordered Hyatt to produce the information.

“The Clarks claim a host of physical and mental impairments from their alleged carbon monoxide exposure, to include permanent brain injuries – thus, the issues at stake have high importance,” he wrote in a Jan. 3 order. In reaching his decision, Crews rejected Hyatt’s complaint that the Clarks could use the information to generate new clients in their class action lawsuit.

Hyatt objected to the magistrate judge’s order and asked U.S. District Court Judge Raymond P. Moore, who is overseeing the case, to put Crews’ order on pause until Moore could consider the objection. The company asked Moore to overturn Crews’ order because it would be a significant burden to produce guests lists more than three years after the incident. Moreover, Hyatt found it difficult to believe that the Clarks would not use the information to add more affected parties to the lawsuit – to the financial ruin of Hyatt.

“If Plaintiffs misuse Defendants’ guests lists to contact and solicit its customers,” wrote lawyers for Hyatt, “and further allege that Defendants ‘poisoned’ their own guests, Defendants will inevitably suffer financial harm or could become insolvent.”

The Clarks have alleged that their proposed class action lawsuit would encompass at least 40 people with damages in excess of $5 million.

Moore is also considering a recommendation from Crews to dismiss most of the Clarks’ claims. In December, the magistrate judge found the Clarks had not plausibly alleged negligence or consumer protection claims. However, he believed the Clarks had a viable claim against Hyatt Place Franchising under Colorado’s Premises Liability Act, which enables people to sue landowners for injuries on their property.

“Even in the face of the Clarks’ specific warnings, the Defendants did nothing to investigate or otherwise warn the Clarks or other guests of an imminent risk of CO [carbon monoxide] poisoning at the Hotel,” the lawsuit alleged.

Hyatt Place Franchising, as well as the other Hyatt-related entities, disputed to the court that they owned, operated or controlled the Boulder hotel.

As of 2018, the National Conference of State Legislatures catalogued only 14 states that required carbon monoxide detectors in hotels and motels. Colorado was not one of those states.

Moore put a pause on Crews’ order requiring the disclosure of contact information for hotel guests on Jan. 18. He has given the Clarks until Jan. 27 to respond to Hyatt’s objection.

The case is Clark et al. v. Hyatt Hotels Corporation et al.