Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Search for legal issues
For help near (city, ZIP code or county)
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location

Whisenhunt v. Southwestern Bell Telephone, No. 08-3542

Article Placeholder Image
By FindLaw Staff on July 17, 2009 3:36 PM

In action to determine whether the utility or developer must bear costs of relocating utilities to accommodate construction of streets within city limits, district court judgment is affirmed where the court did not err in concluding plaintiff must bear the costs, as development is a private commercial development involving no city actors, and the city's conditions to a permit application's approval does not convert a private development into public works project. 

Read Whisenhunt v. Southwestern Bell Telephone, No. 08-3542

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Submitted: April 16, 2009
Filed: July 17, 2009

Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge.

Find a Lawyer

More Options