Pacific Bell Telephone Co. v. California Department of Transportation

Good Law
365 F. Supp. 2d 1085·2005 WL 937739·2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10901
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 4, 2005C02-02500 JSWCalifornia4,290 words

Opinion

Opinion

White, J.

ORDER RE CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Now before the Court is the motion for summary judgment filed by plaintiff Pacific Bell Telephone Company (“Pacific”) and cross-motion for summary judgment file by the defendant State of California (the “State”). Having carefully reviewed the parties’ papers and considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the Court hereby DENIES Pacific’s motion for summary judgment and GRANTS the State’s cross-motion for summary judgment.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

In this action, Pacific is challenging the $6.40 per lineal foot of conduit fee that the State charged Pacific for use of the State’s right-of-way along a eontrolled-aceess highway. To modernize its network and enlarge telecommunications capacity, in the late 1990’s Pacific began developing its North Coast Franchise Obligation Project (“North Coast Project”) to lay fiber optic cable between Ukiah and Eureka. (Declaration of David W. Edmonds in Support of Pacific’s Motion (“Edmonds Decl.”), ¶ 5); (Declaration of L. Byron McDaniel in Support of Pacific’s Motion (“McDaniel Decl.”), ¶ 3). When Pacific began developing its North Coast Project, Pacific was…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.