Kentucky Mother Sues Washington, D.C., Seeking 911 Call Audio After Son’s November 2024 Death

Lawsuit targets access rules for District 911 audio and related emergency-response records

A Kentucky woman has filed a lawsuit against the District of Columbia seeking access to a 911 call recording tied to the sudden death of her son, William Ostertag, 28, who suffered cardiac arrest in November 2024 while working out in the gym of his Washington apartment building.

The case centers on a long-running tension in public-records practice: balancing privacy protections for people in medical emergencies against demands for transparency when questions arise about the timeliness and accuracy of an emergency response. The complaint challenges the District’s refusal to provide the audio to Ostertag’s mother, Stephanie Clemans, on the grounds that she was not the person who placed the call.

What is known about the emergency response timeline

Records described in the lawsuit and related reporting indicate the emergency was initially categorized in a way that affected dispatch decisions. The event was reportedly treated as a seizure rather than a cardiac arrest, and advanced life support was not dispatched immediately. The reported delay before advanced life support was sent was close to eight minutes, despite a fire station located roughly 250 feet from the apartment building.

Clemans has said she is seeking the 911 audio to understand what information was conveyed during the call and how decisions were made during the early minutes of the medical crisis.

Why the 911 recording is central to the dispute

The lawsuit highlights a practical barrier for families who pursue records after a death or serious injury: the District’s practice of limiting release of 911 call audio to the original caller, even when the subject of the call is a family member and even when redactions could be used to protect sensitive details.

In this case, the caller was described as a temporary staff member connected to the building who is no longer traceable, complicating efforts to obtain the recording through consent from the caller.

How District records laws and procedures intersect

Under the District’s Freedom of Information Act framework, agencies are required to produce public records unless exemptions apply, including exemptions involving personal privacy and certain law-enforcement investigatory records. Separately, District procedures for the Office of Unified Communications—custodian of 911 recordings and computer-aided dispatch records—outline two main pathways for obtaining records:

• Freedom of Information Act requests when there is no active litigation.
• Subpoenas when there is active litigation, with specific requirements for service and the scope of requested materials.

The lawsuit seeks to resolve whether the District’s approach to caller-only release is compatible with transparency obligations, particularly when the request comes from an immediate family member trying to evaluate the emergency response surrounding a death.

Broader context for 911 oversight in Washington

The litigation arrives amid continuing scrutiny of the District’s 911 operations, including calls for clearer reporting, documentation of errors, and faster public disclosure of information following critical incidents. Separately from this lawsuit, District lawmakers have considered measures that would expand what the government releases after serious 911-related failures, including recordings and transcripts tied to incidents where response problems are identified.

“I just need to know what happened in those minutes.”

The case remains pending. Any ruling could influence how 911 audio is handled for families seeking answers after a medical emergency and could shape future transparency practices for the District’s emergency communications system.