St. Charles Tower, Inc. v. Kurtz, et al., No. 10-2412 (8th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseSt. Charles Tower, Inc. (St. Charles) filed suit against defendants after they declined to issue St. Charles a conditional use permit necessary to construct a proposed cell-phone tower in Franklin County. After the district court entered a consent judgment, trustees of a homeowner's association that opposed construction of the tower (Intervenors) sought to intervene in the litigation in order to challenge the consent judgment on the grounds that it violated state law. The district court granted their motion to intervene but denied their motion to alter, amend, or vacate the consent judgment and intervenors appealed. The court held that the consent judgment impermissibly circumvented sections 32 and 81 of the Land Use Regulations. Therefore, the court held that the district court erred in holding that the consent judgment did not violate state law and that any violation was justified as a necessary remedy for a violation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B)(v). Accordingly, the court reversed the denial of intervenors' motion and remanded for further proceedings.
Court Description: Civil case. The district court erred in refusing to vacate the consent judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) as the consent judgment requires the defendants to issue a conditional use permit without following the procedural requirements imposed by County's Unified Land Use Regulations, thereby violating state law; the consent judgment was not necessary to remedy an alleged violation of the Telecommunications Act of 1995. Judge Shepherd, concurring in part and dissenting in part.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.