No Pseudonymity as to PTSD-Based Lawsuit About City Siren

From Doe v. City of Ludington, decided today by Judge Hala Jarbou (W.D. Mich.)

Plaintiffs are anonymously suing the City of Ludington for moving and re-connecting a siren in Copeyan Park in downtown Ludington, which allegedly exacerbated Plaintiff John Doe's post-traumatic stress syndrome (PTSD) from his two tours of duty in Afghanistan and one tour of duty in Iraq with the American Armed Forces. Plaintiffs claim that the City of Ludington has violated Plaintiff John Doe's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Federal Fair Housing Act (FFHA) by refusing Plaintiffs' proposed reasonable accommodation of only using the siren for emergencies. Plaintiffs also allege pendant state claims for nuisance, city code violations, and a request for injunctive relief….

Courts begin with a presumption of open judicial proceedings. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally require a complaint to state the names of all parties. Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a). A plaintiff may proceed anonymously only in exceptional circumstances …. Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that their privacy interests substantially outweigh the presumption in favor of open judicial proceedings….

Plaintiffs' fears of social stigma or harm to their reputations fail to outweigh the general interest in favor of open judicial proceedings. Such fears, without more, are not enough to justify an exception. And that is especially true here, where Plaintiffs' identities are already known. {Justin Cooper, City OKs Settlement Talks with Veteran Triggered by Copeyon Park Siren, Ludington Daily News (Mar. 15, 2022), [URL].} The public interest in guaranteeing open access to judicial proceedings requires a heavy basis to overcome…. "One of the essential qualities of a Court of Justice is that its proceedings should be public." … Plaintiffs have failed to meet this burden….

If Plaintiffs wish to proceed with this litigation, they shall file an amended complaint in their full names within seven days from the date of this Order. If they fail to comply, the Court may dismiss the case for lack of prosecution….

For more on the case, see the Complaint.

Comments

[ReaderY]

On the merits, what services does the plaintiff allege the police are providing him when the sirens are on? By what theory do they owe a duty to him?

[John F. Carr]

Complaint is here: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.miwd.104370/gov.uscourts.miwd.104370.1.0.pdf

Nothing specific in it. "Both the ADA and FFHA require reasonable accommodation for the disabled in its activities and policies; since there is no reasonable necessity for the siren, a reasonable accommodation would be to silence the siren except for emergency use."

Also state law claims: The siren is allegedly a public and a private nuisance; the city is violating a city ordinance against disturbing the peace; the city is violating a city ordinance prohibiting amplified sound in city parks.

[DaivdBehar]

There is an unfair asymmetry because the lawyer always sides with evil. Why? Evil is a good client, and the lawyer profession itself is evil, and supports evil.

The plaintiff has a duty to get better. Why should the city accommodate him, and he should not accommodate the city. Force him to get a note from his doctor, there is nothing more to do to help him calm down. If he is non-adherent to treatment, and more can be done to help him medically, dismiss the case and assess all costs to his assets. We are sick of these crybaby, entitled diverses.

[The Turtle Dove]

Perhaps if he put wax in his ears and tied himself to the cell-phone mast...

NB to the knee-jerk reactions: per the complaint, it's activated every night at 10PM. Enough to drive anyone to pseudonymous rage, imho.

Mr. D.

[Krayt]

Well it's here because he was denied anonymity.

Anyway, that's not the fun part.

8. In the late summer of 2021, Defendant City of Ludington reconnected a siren, which had been located in a different location, in Copeyan Park in downtown Ludington.
9. This siren goes off at 12:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m., daily.
10. The siren, which emits noise in excess of 90 decibels, is not used for any legitimate City purpose;
City council members have promoted the use of the siren as being “nostalgic.”

Yes, I am nostalgic for that irritation.

Also, there is a boy who cried wolf problem -- yet another way for lawyers to make money off it -- if it comes on at 3 for a tornado and nobody pays attention.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

What kind of town would sound a siren twice daily, once at 10 p.m.?

A town of 8,000 that is the biggest town in its county, has been losing population for 70 years, has no apparent economic base, and seems immune to modernity.

[tkamenick]

Testing a tornado siren every day is crazy. Testing it at 10pm is cruel. Trying to be pseudonymous here is obnoxious. I really hope the ADA and FFHA claims fail.

[JonFrum]

If you're annoyed by the unnecessary noice, go through the democratic process and get it stopped. Or move. I live near train tracks and and end of a train yard. There is nothing I can do about the noise at 3:00 AM - railroads are excluded by law from noise regulation. It's called Tough Tittie.

The ADA needs to be ammended - it's good intentions gone mad.

[John F. Carr]

The richer Boston suburbs have been willing to pay to install the expensive crossing gates that allow trains to avoid blowing whistles at grade crossings. Boston proper still has to put up with pre-dawn locomotive noises at the train yard.