Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

T-Mobile Northeast LLC v. Fairfax County Board of Supervisors

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided March 1, 2012No. 11-1060Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDavis, Circuit Judge

The majority cogently explains the two circumstances in which a local government’s denial of a wireless facility application “ha[s] the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services” in violation of 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II): (1) where it has imposed a “ ‘blanket ban’ on wireless service,” such as a “general policy that essentially guarantees rejection of all wireless facility applications”; or (2) where there is an “effective absence of coverage” and “a lack of reasonable alternative sites to provide coverage.” Maj. Op. at 266. I agree that this statement is…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Henry v. PurnellCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2011
  2. Sprint Spectrum, L.P. v. WillothCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
  3. Apt Pittsburgh Limited Partnership v. Penn Township Butler County Of PennsylvaniaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
  4. 360° Communications Co. v. Board of Supervisors of Albemarle CountyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2000
  5. Omnipoint Holdings, Inc. v. City of CranstonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2009

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API