[September 06, 2012] Judge: Plaintiff Can't Detect Presence of Wi-Fi Tweet SANTA FE, Sep 06, 2012 (Albuquerque Journal - McClatchy-Tribune Information Services via COMTEX) -- A Santa Fe judge has ruled that a man who claims his neighbor's phone and wireless services have caused him physical harm "cannot reliably detect the presence or absence" of the electromagnetic stimuli he maintains he is sensitive to. District Judge Sarah Singleton in a recent order also took anti-Wi-Fi advocate Arthur Firstenberg to task for failing to comply with her orders to work with a court-appointed expert on protocols for testing his purported sensitivity to wireless signals, despite her "repeated admonitions." Firstenberg filed suit seeking monetary damages from his neighbor Raphaela Monribot and her landlord Robin Leith in January 2010. A victory for him could have a huge impact on the electronics business and everyday consumers of Wi-Fi devices. But because Firstenberg won't cooperate with the judge's expert or the defendants on "blind testing" to determine whether he can tell or is affected when electronics are turned off or on, Singleton ruled that at trial he cannot submit as evidence any testing from his own experts that purports to show symptoms from his exposure to electromagnetic fields. In the absence of any independent testing, Singleton also made findings that Firstenberg can't reliably detect the presence of electromagnetic stimuli and "cannot discern or discriminate the effects of anxiety caused by a testing situation or the presence of electromagnetic stimulus." Attorneys for Monribot and Leith have argued that any symptoms Firstenberg may have are due to his fear of wireless signals or other health issues. Singleton's ruling doesn't mean the end of Firstenberg's case. In other orders filed last week, she said Firstenberg can still try to prove damages for injuries or pain and suffering, and that it is still in dispute whether Monribot "knew with certainty her acts or failures to act" caused him harm. Singleton also postponed the non-jury trial in the case, which had been scheduled to start next week. Christopher Graeser, attorney for Monribot, said she has moved out of state, but he wouldn't comment on whether Firstenberg's continuing litigation prompted the move. Graeser said Singleton still hasn't ruled on what he called "the science" -- whether Firstenberg can present experts who say that electromagnetic sensitivity is real and that Firstenberg has it. "There's also a further aspect that if it's real and he suffers from it, whether it's anything coming from her (Monribot's former) house that's causing harm," Graeser said. Graeser said the motion to postpone the trial "was kind of joint request" from both sides. Firstenberg's attorney, Lindsay Lovejoy Jr., couldn't be reached for comment. In an eight-page order on the testing issue, Singleton wrote that Firstenberg has throughout the case asserted that "painful or objectionable symptoms" have been closely linked to Monribot's property or electronic equipment and that he has often described "immediate" reactions. She also detailed her appointment of an expert, Dr. Ned Siegel, a psychologist, to work out a testing protocol after the two sides couldn't agree, and Firstenberg's failure to cooperate, with his lawyer reiterating Firstenberg's "objection to essentially any testing at all" that is jointly agreed on while intending to present the results of his own private testing at trial. Singleton wrote that Firstenberg testified that complying with proposed testing protocols "would be inconvenient for him because 'he has a life' and because it would subject him to the same injuries he alleges he sustained on account of Defendant Monribot's activities." Firstenberg "continues to maintain that he cannot be tested because of potential injury, despite willingly subjecting himself to the same exposure by moving back into his house" and by willingly subjecting himself to his own expert's testing regimen, Singleton asserted. She found that Firstenberg's actions "have resulted in a de facto refusal to undergo properly requested and Court-ordered provocation testing." 12/10/11 -- Judge Denies Wi-Fi Order By Mark Oswald/Journal Staff Writer SANTA FE -- A judge on Friday again refused to order a Santa Fe woman to stop using her cellphone and wireless services as her neighbor pursues a lawsuit claiming the electronic devices are ruining his health. District Judge Sarah Singleton also expressed frustration over delays in setting up protocols for a "blind test" aimed at determining whether anti-Wi-Fi advocate Arthur Firstenberg is indeed physically sensitive to the electromagnetic emissions from Raphaela Monribot's house. "I had really felt we would be farther along in the process by this time," Singleton said from the bench. Firstenberg filed suit seeking $430,000 in damages in January 2010. A victory for him could have a huge impact on the electronics business and everyday consumers of Wi-Fi devices. Firstenberg did get one legal win Friday. Singleton, over the objections from lawyers for Monribot and her landlord, ruled that Firstenberg can have access to the electric meter and shut-off switch for his house that is on Monribot's property. The two houses are on what used to be a single lot. "That's a big relief," Firstenberg told reporters after the court hearing. He said shutting off the electricity provides him with physical relief. Singleton has appointed an expert, Santa Fe psychologist Ned Siegel, to help with the case. The judge said the lawsuit involves at a minimum a "cutting edge" medical question of whether Firstenberg's health complaints are related to the emissions from Monribot's electronic equipment. Singleton also said she was not going to accept either side's representations about whether Wi-Fi has or hasn't caused Firstenberg's physical complaints. That's why the two sides are supposed to work with Siegel to come up with protocols for a test -- essentially, Firstenberg would be monitored at his house to determine whether he can tell or is affected when Monribot's electronics are turned on and off -- unless Siegel were to determine that such a test could have adverse health consequences for Firstenberg. Singleton said that, until she gets such evidence, she's not going to grant an injunction to require Monribot to turn off her electronic devices pending trial. Singleton has rejected such an injunction request at least once previously -- in April 2010 -- and Monribot's attorney Christopher Graeser said Firstenberg has now asked eight times since the litigation began that she be required to turn off her electronic devices. Testing issues This time, Firstenberg was arguing that he needed the electronics turned off for two months so that he could recover to the point that a valid test of his sensitivity could be conducted. "He can only enter his house at the expense of his health," Lindsay Lovejoy, his attorney, said in court Friday. The symptoms include fatigue, heart palpitations, nausea and insomnia, Lovejoy said. He said Firstenberg is clearly suffering more than Monribot would from being required to switch to a land-line telephone and a cable computer connection and told not to use her dimmer switches as the case proceeds. Firstenberg supports a blind test but first wants a period without exposure to electromagnetic emissions to insure that his prolonged health problems haven't diminished the acuteness of his response, Lovejoy said. But Graeser, Monribot's attorney, said that, in the past, Firstenberg has said he reacts "immediately" and feels better whenever the electronic devices are turned off. Graeser said the question is whether Firstenberg's problems are psychological or medical. And if the judge eventually decides they are a medical condition caused by Wi-Fi, she must then decide on the question of reasonableness -- whether Monribot's use of regular, consumer electronics is an "unreasonable intrusion" on her neighbor, Graeser said. Siegel, the court-appointed expert, told the judge that if it were up to him, the testing of Firstenberg would have been done months ago. The obstacles have been "legalistic" not scientific, he said. Siegel said an expert witness had informed him by email recently that Firstenberg's side had "restricted his communications" with Siegel. Judge Singleton said she found that "very disturbing" and rejected the request for an injunction on Monribot's electronics use on those grounds. At the end of the hearing, Singleton told the parties she expects their experts to cooperate with Siegel and to "make it happen" if he wants a face-to-face meeting with all sides. -- Email the reporter at [email protected]. Call the reporter at 505-992-6269 ___ (c)2012 the Albuquerque Journal (Albuquerque, N.M.) Visit the Albuquerque Journal (Albuquerque, N.M.) at www.abqjournal.com Distributed by MCT Information Services [ Back To TMCnet.com's Homepage ]