--2 Judge Denies Injunction Over Neighbor's Wi-Fi (Updated With Text Of Order)
Feb. 28, 2015

This Week's SFR Picks


* indicates required
Choose your newsletter(s):
February 4, 2015 by Peter St. Cyr  
February 18, 2015 by Peter St. Cyr  
February 11, 2015 by Emily Zak  
February 11, 2015 by Joey Peters  

Special Issues

Protesting the PARCC

Suspended teens want meeting with state officals about the standardized test

Local News A dozen Santa Fe High School students stood in front of the state Public Education Department today, calling for a meeting with Public Education Department Secretary Hanna Skandera over testing that they say goes too far. ... More

Feb. 25, 2015 by Joey Peters



Judge Denies Injunction Over Neighbor's Wi-Fi (Updated With Text Of Order)

April 5, 2010, 12:00 am
By Corey Pein
First Judicial District Judge Sarah Singleton has denied local "electrosensitive" activist Arthur Firstenberg's demand for an injunction against his neighbor's use of wi-fi and other home electronics.

In her seven-page opinion on the headline-grabbing case—emailed to SFR by lawyers for Firstenberg's neighbor, Raphaela Monribot—Judge Singleton broadly rules that Firstenberg is unlikely to prevail on the merits of his claim, because he has failed to prove that Monribot's home electronics are the specific cause of his symptoms.

Proof of a harm-causing dosage of wi-fi "is noticably lacking in this case," Singleton writes. She goes on:
"[When Firstenberg] was initially diagnosed with EMS the concern seemed to be exposure to sources of large amounts of electromagnetic radiation such as high voltage transmission lines, broadcast and radio towers, and cellular phone towers. Now the concern seems to encompass power sources like dimmer switches."

Singleton also takes a swipe at the doctors who have diagnosed Firstenberg's condition. "[M]ore importantly, one of the alternative potential causes for Plaintiff's problems is a psychiatric condition," Singleton writes.
"Given [Firstenberg's] familial history of mental illness, complete psychological evaluation, including testing, should have been included in the differntial diagnosis. ...No convincing explanation was given for why this critical step was omitted."

Stay tuned for more details.

It's unclear what bearing this ruling will have for future claims by "electrosensitive" individuals (or anti-wireless petitions to the City Council), but Singleton's decision is clearly unfavorable to the activists.

Update April 6: One of Monribot's attorneys, Joseph Romero, writes in an email, "While the case will still go forward [to trial], the Court's decision presents a significant set-back to Firstenberg's case."

SFR has uploaded Judge Singleton's ruling below, highlighting the interesting bits. Click each image for a larger version.


comments powered by Disqus