Why not more lawsuits?

Classic

List

Threaded

7 messages Options

Lynnezhu

Why not more lawsuits?

Why don't more of us file lawsuits with telecom companies? For instance At and T installed such powerful wi fi at my neighbors that it hospitalized me and caused 7 ER trips. And it is forcing me to sell my house. Where is the law that allows At and T and others to sell such dangerous equipment? My neighbor is not at fault--he is ignorant (but won't turn it off or get wired). Why wouldn't At and T have to confine the radiation to the home of the person ordering it? Maybe there is a obvious answer why this is not happening except in a few cases of cell phone/brain tumors. I have doctors verifying this...and financial losses...

I know of no laws allowing this... Do you? (not here talking about cell tower placement--I know there are laws there) but about wi fi from neighbors. Why shouldn't telecom companies be forced to put up shielding to confine the signal to the person ordering?

Fog Top

Re: Why not more lawsuits?

So far there is no legal precedence in this country. It's a corporation nation and they own the rule makers.

A few have been successful recently with getting smart meters off their homes by filing HUD complaints since the Fair Housing Act concludes that a person has the right to live safely and happily in their home (apartment, visiting a friend, etc). This has nothing to do with the place being a HUD subsidized housing unit. It's imperative that a person filing a HUD complaint for ES reasons has a doctor who will state that their ES is disabling and they are in need of accommodation.

From: Lynnezhu [via ES] <ml-node+[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 2:00 PM
To: Fog Top
Subject: [ES] Why not more lawsuits?

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://es-forum.com/Why-not-more-lawsuits-tp4029574.html

ES - Why not more lawsuits?

es-forum.com

Why not more lawsuits?. Why don't more of us file lawsuits with telecom companies? For instance At and T installed such powerful wi fi at my neighbors that it hospitalized me and caused 7 ER trips. ...

To start a new topic under ES, email ml-node+[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from ES, click here.

Marc Martin

Re: Why not more lawsuits?

Administrator

In reply to this post by Lynnezhu

I know of one lawsuit, that was lost in court and on appeal:

http://www.abqjournal.com/552362/decision-against-santa-fe-anti-wifi-suit-upheld-by-state-appeals-court.html

Patricia

Re: Why not more lawsuits?

In reply to this post by Lynnezhu

anyone know of an attorney who would like to

take on a class action suit? a lot of equipment

these days is WAY overkill and has no "dial

down" options. in fact, the innocent public

thinks that the "more powerful" a piece of

equipment is, the better it is.

if each piece of equipment operated apart

from the 'grid', the amount of any particular

item's radiation might not be so bad, but when

they all overlap and accumulates... the effect

is horrendous.

i'd be happy to sign on to a class action suit.

love, patricia

On Jun 29, 2016, at 9:00 AM, Lynnezhu [via ES] wrote:

Why don't more of us file lawsuits with telecom companies? For instance At and T installed such powerful wi fi at my neighbors that it hospitalized me and caused 7 ER trips. And it is forcing me to sell my house. Where is the law that allows At and T and others to sell such dangerous equipment? My neighbor is not at fault--he is ignorant (but won't turn it off or get wired). Why wouldn't At and T have to confine the radiation to the home of the person ordering it? Maybe there is a obvious answer why this is not happening except in a few cases of cell phone/brain tumors. I have doctors verifying this...and financial losses...

I know of no laws allowing this... Do you? (not here talking about cell tower placement--I know there are laws there) but about wi fi from neighbors. Why shouldn't telecom companies be forced to put up shielding to confine the signal to the person ordering?

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://es-forum.com/Why-not-more-lawsuits-tp4029574.html

To start a new topic under ES, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from ES, click here.

Fog Top

Re: Why not more lawsuits?

Here's a story of an attorney who won the largest award ever for a stray voltage lawsuit against Idaho Power.http://www.emfacts.com/2005/11/rf-on-powerlines-175-million-court-case/

Family members as well as the cows were harmed in this lawsuit. Immediately following the suit, Idaho's legislature passes a bill regarding the protection of cows from stray voltage but said nothing about the protection of humans.

The attorney of the defendants was Kenneth Peterson. He was with the law offices of Morris Laing out of their Topeka or Wichita, KS branch. His name is no longer listed there, but they might be able to connect you with him. I spoke with him years ago and he was very familiar with the electrical sensitivity issue. I believe he has also authored a book about nuclear plants.

From: Patricia [via ES] <ml-node+[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 2:53 PM
To: Fog Top
Subject: [ES] Re: Why not more lawsuits?

anyone know of an attorney who would like to

take on a class action suit? a lot of equipment

these days is WAY overkill and has no "dial

down" options. in fact, the innocent public

thinks that the "more powerful" a piece of

equipment is, the better it is.

if each piece of equipment operated apart

from the 'grid', the amount of any particular

item's radiation might not be so bad, but when

they all overlap and accumulates... the effect

is horrendous.

i'd be happy to sign on to a class action suit.

love, patricia

On Jun 29, 2016, at 9:00 AM, Lynnezhu [via ES] wrote:

Why don't more of us file lawsuits with telecom companies? For instance At and T installed such powerful wi fi at my neighbors that it hospitalized me and caused 7 ER trips. And it is forcing me to sell my house. Where is the law that allows At and T and others to sell such dangerous equipment? My neighbor is not at fault--he is ignorant (but won't turn it off or get wired). Why wouldn't At and T have to confine the radiation to the home of the person ordering it? Maybe there is a obvious answer why this is not happening except in a few cases of cell phone/brain tumors. I have doctors verifying this...and financial losses...

I know of no laws allowing this... Do you? (not here talking about cell tower placement--I know there are laws there) but about wi fi from neighbors. Why shouldn't telecom companies be forced to put up shielding to confine the signal to the person ordering?

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://es-forum.com/Why-not-more-lawsuits-tp4029574.html

ES - Why not more lawsuits?

es-forum.com

Why not more lawsuits?. Why don't more of us file lawsuits with telecom companies? For instance At and T installed such powerful wi fi at my neighbors that it hospitalized me and caused 7 ER trips. ...

To start a new topic under ES, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from ES, click here.

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://es-forum.com/Why-not-more-lawsuits-tp4029574p4029579.html

To start a new topic under ES, email ml-node+[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from ES, click here.

Patricia

Re: Why not more lawsuits?

In reply to this post by Marc Martin

this sounds so very ungrounded, i have a hard time

imagining an attorney with half a brain would take

it to court. i wonder if it was designed specifically

to "set a precedent" so that subsequent cases

could refer to the precedent set to dismiss concerns

about EMF. ? believe me, it is not impossible for

our 'owners' to dream up such a scheme.

he who comes up with the most dastardly tricks,

wins big prizes within the club!

On Jun 29, 2016, at 1:21 PM, Marc Martin [via ES] wrote:

I know of one lawsuit, that was lost in court and on appeal:

http://www.abqjournal.com/552362/decision-against-santa-fe-anti-wifi-suit-upheld-by-state-appeals-court.html

Fog Top

Re: Why not more lawsuits?

Arthur Firstenburg as far as I know is truly ES. He leads the group called Cellular Phone Task Force. He refused to get an attorney and represented himself in these proceedings. Many in the ES community were urging him not to sue or to get counsel because of the mistakes he made. Also, the defendant in the case was his former lover who decided to get back at him by moving in next door and then using potent wireless devices in her home to "get" back at him.

From: Patricia [via ES] <ml-node+[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, July 1, 2016 4:11 AM
To: Fog Top
Subject: [ES] Re: Why not more lawsuits?

this sounds so very ungrounded, i have a hard time

imagining an attorney with half a brain would take

it to court. i wonder if it was designed specifically

to "set a precedent" so that subsequent cases

could refer to the precedent set to dismiss concerns

about EMF. ? believe me, it is not impossible for

our 'owners' to dream up such a scheme.

he who comes up with the most dastardly tricks,

wins big prizes within the club!

On Jun 29, 2016, at 1:21 PM, Marc Martin [via ES] wrote:

I know of one lawsuit, that was lost in court and on appeal:

http://www.abqjournal.com/552362/decision-against-santa-fe-anti-wifi-suit-upheld-by-state-appeals-court.html

Decision against Santa Fe anti-WiFi suit upheld by state appeals court

www.abqjournal.com

SANTA FE - A three-judge panel of the state Court of Appeals has upheld a court decision against Santa Fe anti-Wi-Fi activist Arthur Firstenberg in his lawsuit against a neighbor over her use of devices…

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://es-forum.com/Why-not-more-lawsuits-tp4029574p4029585.html

To start a new topic under ES, email ml-node+[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from ES, click here.