The Municipal Coo — April 14, 2026

Around the District

Dove v. Dove Hearing Concludes; Ruling Expected

Nest Court, Chamber B · Court Desk

The hearing on the merits in Dove v. Dove (AMNC-2026-007B) concluded Monday after approximately ninety minutes of testimony. Both parties appeared pro se. A witness for the Petitioner was also heard.

Details of the testimony have not been released, though the Clerk's office confirmed that a six-page supplemental filing by the witness was entered into the record over the objection of no one, because no one had been asked.

Hon. M. Owl is expected to issue a ruling within ten business days. The Court has reminded both parties that "business days" does not include weekends, holidays, or days when the Clerk is not in the mood to process paperwork.

The disputed nest at 14 Sycamore Lane, Lot 7, remains occupied by the Petitioner and two unhatched eggs.

Court Notices

Avian Municipal Nest Court — Branch Division

Scheduling — AMNC-2026-009A

Wren v. Wren. Noise complaint (domestic). Hearing scheduled May 12, 2026, 10:00 AM, Chamber B. The Petitioner is reminded to bring documentation of the alleged humming. The Respondent is reminded that "I don't even know I'm doing it" has been attempted before and did not succeed.

Clerk: T. Nuthatch.

Classified

FOR SALE: Nest, south-facing, recently vacated

Location: elm adjacent to Municipal Oak. Two-fork construction. Upper canopy. Morning light. Previous occupants departed amicably, which in this case means they stopped speaking and one of them left during a rainstorm.

Structurally sound. Some cosmetic wear near the entrance where the door was slammed, which is not a thing nests have, but this one somehow does.

Viewing by appointment. Box 006, c/o this publication.

Personal

FEMALE, ROBIN, 39

I was going to write something clever here but I've been on four dates this spring and all of them described themselves as "not like other birds" and all of them were exactly like other birds.

I like mornings. I like worms. I like knowing where someone is without having to ask. If you are the kind of male who disappears for eleven days and calls it "thinking," I have already dated you and I did not enjoy it.

Employed. Stable. My branch is my own and I am not sharing it until I'm sure.

Reply to: Box 39-R. Be normal.

Karen Hawk

Attorney at Law · Rapid Descents · Clean Separations

Specializing in contested nest divisions, emergency no-perch orders, and situations where he says it was "just drinks." Eighteen years of family law experience. Exposed to every version of "it's not what it looks like." Still not impressed.

"She got me the branch, the eggs, and an apology I could use in future proceedings." — former client

Free consultation · Evening and weekend appointments

I do not do couples counseling. That ship has sailed, sunk, and been entered into evidence.

Letters

Letters to the Editor

Letters may be edited for length and clarity. Views expressed are the author's.

Dear Editor,

I would like to respond to the resident of Birch Court who wrote to complain about post-separation perch usage.

I am the ex-husband in question. The perch at the south end of the park was not "introduced" to me. I found it independently in 2022, before we were even paired. I have a witness. The witness is my mother, who I acknowledge may not be considered impartial, but who has been using the perch longer than either of us.

I am not following my ex-wife. I am following my routine. If she finds my presence upsetting, I suggest she adjust her schedule. I adjusted mine for nine years. It did not help.

— Gerald H., Sycamore Lane