In addition to the proposed merger between Sprint and T-Mobile and its planned consolidation of cell sites, providers such as Verizon and AT&T are trading their interests in towers and other wireless deployments. ...more
This Supplement is intended for use in conjunction with Curtin’s California Land Use & Planning Law, Thirty-Fourth Edition (2014), authored by Perkins Coie attorneys Cecily Talbert Barclay and Matthew S. Gray. In lieu of...more
On January 14, the U.S. Supreme Court in T-Mobile South, LLC v. City of Roswell, held that the City of Roswell ("City") violated the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(iii) (the "Telecommunications...more
On January 14, 2014, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in T-Mobile South, LLC v. City of Roswell. At issue was the breadth of the requirement in 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(iii) of the Telecommunications...more
On January 14, 2015, the Supreme Court decided T-Mobile South, LLC v. City of Roswell, Georgia, No. 13-975. The Court held that the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(iii), requires a locality to provide...more
When T-Mobile sought to place a cell-tower in a park owned by the City of Huntington Beach, California, the City granted the company all the regulatory approvals it required. But the City also informed T-Mobile that before...more