Legal Opinion
Cellular Telephone Co. v. Board of Adjustment of the Borough of Paramus
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided January 27, 1999No. Civ. 97-3082(DRD)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DEBEVOISE, Senior District Judge.
A licensed provider of wireless cellular telephone services brought this action against a municipality’s board of adjustment claiming that the board’s denial of the provider’s application for variances to construct a wireless telecommunications facility in a residential zone violated the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and New Jersey state law. The provider, Cellular Telephone Company, d/b/a AT & T Wireless Services (“AT & T”), and the municipality’s board, the Board of Adjustment of the Borough of Paramus (the “Board”), have filed cross-motions for…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- California RSA No. 4 v. Madera CountyDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2003
- Verizon Wireless v. DOUGLAS CNTY. KS BD. OF COM'RS.District Court, D. Kansas · 2008
- Nextel Communications of the Mid-Atlantic, Inc. v. Town of RandolphDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2002
- Omnipoint Communications Enterprises, L.P. v. Warrington TownshipDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1999
- Capital Telecom Holdings II LLC v. Grove City OhioDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2019