- Bay Communications Files Suit in Maine Over Denied Tower Plans. June 23, 2020. https://insidetowers.com/cell-tower-news-bay-communications-files-suit-in-maine-over-denied-tower-plans/?utm_source=Inside+Towers+List&utm_campaign=9b9c7a1185-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_06_22_02_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_af16c4fc22-9b9c7a1185-91674626
Cell Phone Court Cases
No American court has yet ruled that cell phones can cause brain cancer either generally or specifically, nor have the courts prohibited the use of Wi-Fi in schools, however, an Italian judge in 2017 has ruled for the plaintiff. There have been at least 14 cases that have gone through the courts on brain tumors. This provides lengthy but interesting reading. In April, 2017 an Italian judge ruled that excessive cell phone use can result in cancer. The judge notably did not allow any admittance of research funded by industry. It appears to be the first time a judge has ruled there may be link between cell phones and brain cancer.
Italian Supreme Court, April 21, 2017 ruled that excessive, work-related use of a mobile phone caused an executive from Telecom Italia to develop a benign brain tumor. American Article Newsweek
Judge Frederick H. Weinberg, 2014. -MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON EXPERT WITNESS ADMISSIBILITY. Bret and Laura Bocook versus Motorola,Inc., et al., 2014. He notes “It is not the court’s role to resolve disputes within the scientific community. The very existence of a dispute precludes admission.” Court Order Expert Witness Testimony Admittance
Dr. Jerry L. Phillips, January 14, 2013, expert testimony for the Maine Public Utilities Commission in opposition to Smart Meters. Dr. Phillips Testimony
Lloyd Morgan, Testimony, US District Court. Portland Schools vs David Morrison. In support of an injunction enjoining Portland School’s use of Wi-Fi.
December 22, 2011. Amended Testimony
Judge Frederick H. Weinberg. 2001. Superior Court District of Columbia. Multiple Plaintiffs vs Motorola, Inc., Qualcomm, Inc., Nokia, Inc., Audiovoxx communications, Inc. Dismissal of first court case on brain tumors and cell phones, with plaintiffs suing for damages from illness and loss. Judges Decision
Cell Phone “Right to Know” Court Cases
In the United States to date there has been one cell phone “Right to Know” court case that has been won so far and that is the Berkeley Cell Phone” Right to Know” City Ordinance originally, adopted May 1, 2015. After loosing an appeal, CTIA -The Wireless Association has petitioned the United States Supreme Court to hear their case against the City of Berkeley’s cell phone “right to know” ordinance (Jan 2018). CITA or Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association is a 501c(6) non profit association established in 1984. After several appeals by the cell phone industry association CTIA, judges ruled in favor of Berkeley Ordinance on July 1, 2019.
The Berkeley City Law requires cellphone retailers to provide consumers with the following notification:
“To assure safety, the Federal Government requires that cell phones meet radiofrequency (RF) exposure guidelines. If you carry or use your phone in a pants or shirt pocket or tucked into a bra when the phone is ON and connected to a wireless network, you may exceed the federal guidelines for exposure to RF radiation. Refer to the instructions in your phone or user manual for information about how to use your phone safely.”
For a full history of the Berkeley Cell Phone Right to Know Ordinance see Safer EMR site at Berkeley Cell Phone Right to Know Ordinance.
Ellie Marks Testimony Berkeley Cell Phone Right to Know Ordinance
Testimony on Berkeley Cell Phone Right to Know from Ellie Marks from the California Brain Tumor Association who reads letters from Dr. Lisa Bailey and Dr. John West who completed a study on breast cancers in several young women who kept cell phones in their bra. Nov 18, 2014 Berkeley City Council Meeting.
San Francisco Cell Phone Right to Know Ordinance Failed After Passage
In 2010 San Francisco led the way towards a Cell Phone Right to Know Ordinance that asked retailers to list SAR levels (a heat measurement of radiation levels) which are required by law to be in the pamphlet given to customers when they buy their phone. CTIA- The wireless Industry argued that the law was unconstitutional, misleading to consumers, and that it infringed on first amendment rights of retailers. After a 3 year battle an injunction was filed and the law became non operational. Cell Phone Law Killed by CITA.
FCC Oder on Rapid Deployment of 5G and Small Cell Towers Lawsuits
- FCC Fast Plan Provokes Lawsuits
- Congresswomen Eshoo and Spier Introduce HR 530 to Block FCC Small Cell Order
U.S. Court of Appeals Motions, Oppositions and Respondents in FCC Lawsuit by Date
- Montgomery_County v FCC Brief_1 2019
- 12/17/18 – FCC Lawsuit- San Jose vs FCC – Motion to Stay -10th-circuit-case-18-9568- Dec 17, 2018
- 1/1/19 – FCC Lawsuit -Respondant- January 1, 2019, Wireless industry opposition to motion to stay- 10th Circuit Case-18-9568
- 1/2/19 – FCC Lawsuit- Respondant- January 2, 2019, Wireless industry review and opposition to motion for stay of 10th-Circuit Case-18-9568
- 1/8/19 – FCC Lawsuit- Court reply to oppositions to motion to stay, January 8, 2019, -10th Circuit Case-18-9568
- 1/10/19 – FCC Lawsuit- Transfer from 10th to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals January 10, 2019