The Wireless Contractors Association (WCA) seeks a summons requiring defendant subcontractor New Age Telecom to show cause within 20 days why its four claims of lien against the plaintiff totaling more than $84,000 in unpaid balances shouldn’t be vacated, said WCA's Feb. 13 complaint (docket 16-2023-CA-000911-XXXX-MA) in the 4th Judicial Circuit Court in Duval County, Florida. WCA signed a Sept. 1 contract for New Age to furnish “certain construction services” on WCA’s projects on an “as-needed basis,” it said. In each of four WCA projects, which appear from attached purchase orders to be for Dish Network installations in and around Jacksonville, New Age “failed to satisfy all contractual conditions precedent in order to be entitled to payment,” it said. New Age files the claims of lien “notwithstanding its material breach of the parties’ agreement and failure to complete its scope of work,” it said. New Age “abandoned” each of the four projects, and WCA was forced to hire another subcontractor to complete New Age’s “scope of work,” it said. The claims of lien are “invalid and unenforceable,” it said. If New Age doesn't respond to the show cause summons, WCA seeks an order vacating and canceling the liens of record and awarding WCA costs and attorney’s fees, plus any relief the court “deems proper,” it said. WCA's website says it specializes in tower services, small-cell distribution, 5G upgrades and site "acquisition and integration." New Age's website says it's a specialist in "structured cabling," among other communications and security services.
Crown Castle recovered $71,342 in damages, plus court costs and interest, in its negligence complaint against contractor R&Y Underground, said a final judgment Monday (docket CACE-22-017496) in the 17th Judicial Circuit Court for Broward County, Florida. The court granted Crown Castle’s default motion last month (see 2301110001). Crown Castle alleged R&Y caused “actual damages” when excavating at an intersection in Miramar, Florida, when it failed to use “accepted engineering and construction practices.”
The village of Muttontown, New York, will file a letter motion by Monday for a discovery stay in its cell tower fight with AT&T (see 2302210056), said U.S. Magistrate Judge Lee Dunst for Eastern New York in Central Islip in a text-only order Tuesday (docket 2:22-cv-5524). AT&T’s letter in opposition to the discovery stay is due March 13, it said. AT&T alleges Muttontown improperly denied its application to build a 165-foot-tall cell tower to remedy service gaps in its wireless coverage (see 2210090001). Muttontown seeks the discovery stay as it awaits the ruling of U.S. District Judge Joanna Seybert on the village’s motion to dismiss AT&T’s complaint. Dunst’s order said his schedule won't be adjourned “absent a showing of good cause and confirmation that the parties have complied with their meet and confer obligations.” Muttontown will be permitted no reply brief unless the court grants leave, it said. “Further, the parties are on notice that their repeated filings demonstrate a continued disregard for compliance” with Dunst’s “individual rules,” it said. Future failure to comply with the rules “may result in a denial of requested relief,” it said. More than five months after the filing of AT&T’s Sept. 15 complaint, Muttontown hasn't filed a formal answer. Time and again during the litigation, Dunst instructed the parties to meet and confer on joint status reports, only to watch them respond with separate filings (see 2301200043).
Extenet in March 2021 hired a contractor, U.S. Infrastructure, to locate and mark its underground utility cable and facilities under a 48-hour “dig notice” to protect the cable and facilities from potential damage during excavation, said the excavator, Horizon Underground, in a third-party petition Feb. 10 (docket DC-22-17265) in the 101st District Texas Court in Dallas County. The contractor negligently “marked a portion of the area but not all of the area identified in the dig notice,” said the petition. It marked the Extenet cable as terminating at an existing utility pole, but that cable in fact extended for another 650 feet past the pole, and that’s where the damage occurred, said Horizon. Extenet in a Dec. 16 complaint blamed Horizon employees for causing $34,454 in damages while excavating, boring and trenching without Extenet’s consent (see 2212200067). But in the "unlikely event" the court finds Horizon liable to Extenet for the damages, Horizon “asserts that it is entitled to judgment for contribution” against U.S. Infrastructure, said the petition.
Muttontown, New York, seeks a discovery stay in its cell tower fight with AT&T until U.S. District Judge Joanna Seybert for Eastern New York in Central Islip rules on the village’s motion to dismiss AT&T’s complaint, Muttontown wrote U.S. Magistrate Judge Lee Dunst in a letter Monday (docket 2:22-cv-05524). Forcing municipal clients to spend taxpayer money “for claims that more than likely will be dismissed would not be appropriate,” said the village of its rationale for a stay. AT&T responded in a separate letter to Dunst Monday, asking the judge to require Muttontown to file a formal motion for a discovery stay by Friday, or by “a date certain as soon thereafter as possible.” Muttontown “should not be permitted to further delay this matter” on the pretext that the court “has to first determine if a motion for a stay is necessary,” said AT&T. If the court enters a stay without a formal motion, AT&T “requests an opportunity to respond,” it said. Contrary to Muttontown’s assertions, AT&T’s claims are not more than likely to be dismissed, “and the pending motion to dismiss does not justify a stay of discovery,” it said. AT&T alleges the municipality violated the Telecommunications Act by denying the company’s application to build a 165-foot-tall cell tower to remedy service gaps in its wireless coverage, and not basing the denial on substantial written evidence in the record (see 2210090001).
U.S. District Judge Jose Martinez for Southern Florida in Miami signed an order Monday (docket 1:23-cv-20009) scheduling a trial to begin during the two-week period starting Feb. 12 in Terra Towers’ breach of contract complaint against American Tower International. Terra and co-plaintiffs TBS Management and DT Holdings allege ATI improperly withdrew from an $800 million Latin American telecom tower project contract called Project Codu (see 2301030035). ATI moved to dismiss the complaint on grounds a contract was never in place for ATI to breach (see 2302010002). Mediation in the case is required, and Martinez gave the parties an Oct. 12 deadline for choosing a mediator, said the order. Mediation is to be completed by Dec. 11, it said.
Defendant Academy Medical’s “meandering” Jan. 12 counterclaim alleging T-Mobile and Crown Castle were guilty of cell tower deceit (see 2301130001) should be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, said the plaintiffs’ motion Friday (docket 1:22-cv-00910) in U.S. District Court for New Mexico. T-Mobile’s assignment of sublease rights to Crown Castle and in turn to Dish Network without notifying Academy prevented the defendant “from exercising its contractual right to object to the sublease,” alleged the property owner’s counterclaim. But the “plain language” of the amended cell tower lease “expressly permits subleasing and imposes no limitations on subleasing,” except a requirement that any sublessee agree to abide by the terms of the contract, countered the plaintiffs. The provision “does not in any way restrict or narrow a sublessee’s rights relative to those of the original lessee,” nor does the lease prohibit a further sublease by any sublessee, they said. The “net effect” is that a sublessee operating in accordance with the terms of the lease “may further sublease and need not provide any notice” to Academy, as the property owner contends was required, they said.
Google Fiber struck utility lines and damaged underground cable owned by Rocky Mountain Power, alleged a Feb. 2 negligence complaint in Utah's 3rd Judicial District Court in Salt Lake City. The defendants were digging within 24 inches of the utility line markings using power-driven equipment and failed to exercise due care in their work, it said. They also failed to notify the proper parties to correctly locate and mark utility lines after the markings were disturbed and failed to notify the proper parties to mark and re-mark utility lines, said the complaint. Google Fiber refused to pay for damages it allegedly caused. Rocky Mountain Power seeks cost of damages, at $3,403, for labor, services and materials.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Daniel Stewart for Northern New York in Albany set an in-person status conference for Feb. 22 at 11 a.m. EST in Verizon’s cell tower dispute with the town of Saugerties, New York, said a text-only entry Wednesday in docket 1:22-cv-107. Verizon and co-plaintiff Tarpon Towers allege the town’s refusal to act on Verizon’s May 2019 tower application violates the Telecommunications Act by failing to render a decision within a reasonable period of time, preventing Verizon from providing service where known service gaps and network deficiencies “indisputably exist.”
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a stay Monday on a League of California Cities challenge of the FCC’s June 2020 wireless infrastructure declaratory ruling. The court granted parties’ joint motion (see 2301300035). The court schedule says the FCC’s brief will be due March 1. Intervenors supporting the agency must file by March 8, cities’ reply briefs are due March 31 and petitioner-side intervenors April 7 (case 20-71765).