Legal Opinion
Williams Communications, LLC v. City of Riverside
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 18, 2003No. E032661PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HOLLENHORST, J.
On September 13, 2000, the City of Riverside (City) and Williams Communications, Inc. entered into a license agreement. The agreement allowed Williams to install fiber optic cable in conduit laid in the streets of Riverside in consideration of the payment of $1.50 per foot of conduit. The payment due under the agreement totaled $750,103. Williams paid that sum and then filed this action to recover it. After a court trial, the trial court found that the payment was legal and that Williams was not entitled to refund of the $750,103. Williams appeals. We reverse.
FACTS
The…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Ghirardo v. AntonioliCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- County of Los Angeles v. Southern California Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1948
- Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
- Television Transmission, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- County Sanitation District No. 2 v. County of KernCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Sterling Park, L.P. v. City of Palo AltoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
- Pacific Bell Telephone Co. v. City of Walnut CreekDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2006
- Fogarty v. City of ChicoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Trinity Park, L.P. v. City of SunnyvaleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.