Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

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

By FindLaw Staff on July 17, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

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.

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard