T-Mobile West LLC v. City and County of S.F.
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtOpinion of the Court by Corrigan, J.
*1113 By ordinance the City and County of San Francisco (the City) requires wireless telephone service companies to obtain permits to *1114 install and maintain lines and equipment in public rights-of-way. Some permits will not issue unless the application conforms to the City's established *415 aesthetic guidelines. Plaintiffs assert a facial challenge urging that (1) the ordinance is preempted by state law and (2) even if not preempted, the ordinance violates a state statute. The trial court and the Court of Appeal rejected both arguments. We do likewise.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs are telecommunications…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. LTV Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Tobe v. City of Santa AnaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Ex Parte DanielsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Pacific Legal Foundation v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
- Sherwin-Williams Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Mathews v. BecerraCalifornia Supreme Court · 2019
- AIDS Healthcare Foundation v. BontaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
- Apartment Assn. of Los Angeles etc. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2026
- California Attorney General Opinion 25-902, California Attorney General Reports2026
- Center for Biological Diversity, Inc. v. Public Utilities Com.California Supreme Court · 2025
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.