Preferred Sites, LLC v. Troup County

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding insufficient petitions which gave “no articulated reasons for the opposition” and a single affidavit reciting “generalized concerns” about the tower’s negative aesthetic impact when there was no other evidence in the record
• 11th USCA11 Case: 24-11648 Document: 43-1 Date Filed: 08/13/2025 Page: 6 of 8 6 Opinion of the Court 24-11648 Cir. 2002
• “[G]eneralized concerns about aesthetics are insufficient to constitute substantial evidence upon which the Board could rely.”
• locality “may not rely on rationalizations constructed after the fact to support the denial of [a provider’s] application”
• “The ‘final action’ which triggers the running of the 30-day statute of limitations, therefore, is the state or local authority's issuance of its decision in writing.”
• “mere generalized concerns regarding aesthetics are 2 insufficient to constitute substantial evidence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).