Sprint Spectrum L.P. v. Willoth’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
4 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 47 U.S.C. § 332
Relies on Schad v. Borough of Mount Ephraim · Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union · BellSouth Mobility Inc. v. Gwinnett County, GA · Cellular Telephone Co. v. Rosenberg · Consolidated Edison Co. v. Hoffman
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he regulation of the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities by any State or local government or instrumentality thereof— (II) shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services.[ 16 ]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the cumulative impact of multiple towers would have a significant environmental impact on the Town of Ontario.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“) to provide broadband personal communications services (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.