Preliminary analysis of 79 pickleball noise consultant reports by 36 consultants

The author, a retired mechanical engineer and patent attorney sat on a Homeowners Association (HOA) Board that converted four tennis courts to thirteen pickleball courts without installing the noise absorbing barrier recommended in three reports by two acoustical consultants. A nuisance lawsuit seeks an injunction to close the courts and money damages. The purpose of this analysis, (and its companion paper “Improving the Persuasiveness of the Pickleball Noise Consultant Report – A Critique and Proposal”) is to survey the work consultants are doing and then propose how the consultants can improve the reliability and persuasiveness of their consultancy. Anecdotes and observations are drawn from the data to identify best practices and worst practices of the consultants and their reports. This paper may be useful to consultants in planning their future pickleball studies or in deciding to refer these projects to a more experienced pickleball noise boutique firm. City and HOA officials may be assisted in interpreting the completeness and reliability of a consultant's work as they make important decisions on protecting their communities from noise complaints and risks of nuisance litigation. Attorneys may be informed and recognize the challenges of using the consultant report in the litigation setting.