Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

City Of Pomona v. Sunset Telephone And Telegraph Company

• 1911 • 224 U.S. 330 • White Court
In the case of City of Pomona v. Sunset Telephone and Telegraph Company in 1911, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Sunset Telephone and Telegraph Company. The dispute arose when the city council of Pomona, California passed an ordinance requiring all telephone companies to obtain a franchise from them before laying down any lines within city limits. However, Sunset argued that they had already obtained a statewide franchise from the state legislature which allowed them to lay lines...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief White Court
Term: 1911
Docket: 215
224 U.S. 330
32 S. Ct. 477
56 L. Ed. 788
1912 U.S. LEXIS 2306
Argued: Mar 14, 1912

City Of Pomona v. Sunset Telephone And Telegraph Company

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of City of Pomona v. Sunset Telephone and Telegraph Company in 1911, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Sunset Telephone and Telegraph Company. The dispute arose when the city council of Pomona, California passed an ordinance requiring all telephone companies to obtain a franchise from them before laying down any lines within city limits. However, Sunset argued that they had already obtained a statewide franchise from the state legislature which allowed them to lay lines anywhere within California without needing additional permission from local authorities. The court agreed with this argument stating that municipalities cannot override franchises granted by state legislatures unless explicitly given such power by statute or constitutionally provided for it. Therefore, Pomona's ordinance was deemed invalid as it conflicted with rights previously granted to Sunset by their statewide franchise.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for City of Pomona v. Sunset Telephone and Telegraph Company, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's decision to uphold a city ordinance that required telephone companies to bury their wires underground. He argued that this requirement was an unreasonable exercise of police power because it did not serve any clear public safety purpose. Instead, he believed it imposed unnecessary costs on businesses without providing any significant benefits to the community at large. Furthermore, he contended that such regulations should be considered as taking private property for public use without just compensation, which is prohibited by the Constitution. Therefore, in his view, the ordinance violated both state law and constitutional principles protecting property rights.

Opinion written by Justice OWHolmes
Decided: Apr 08, 1912
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms