Legal Opinion

New Par v. City of Saginaw

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided July 10, 2001No. 00-10240-BCPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

LAWSON, District Judge.

The plaintiff, a provider of cellular telephone service, has filed this action under the Telecommunications Act of 1996(Act) seeking mandamus and injunctive relief from a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of Saginaw denying a variance which would have allowed the placement of a cellular telephone tower on property which the City’s zoning ordinance otherwise would not have permitted. The plaintiff contends that the denial violates the…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  5. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court for Southern Dist. of IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. MIOP, INC. v. City of Grand RapidsDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API