1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 259 F.2d
  5. 259 F.2d 202 (1958)
 

ST. LOUIS AMUSEMENT CO. v. FEDERAL COMMUN. COM'N

No. 14245.

259 F.2d 202 (1958)

ST. LOUIS AMUSEMENT COMPANY, Appellant, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Appellee, Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., KWK, Incorporated, 220 Television, Inc., Broadcast House, Inc., Intervenors.

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.

Judgment Entered July 8, 1958.

Opinion Filed August 28, 1958.

Certiorari Denied November 17, 1958.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Russell Hardy, Sr., Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Russell Hardy, Jr., Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant.

Mr. Warren E. Baker, General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, with whom Mr. Richard A. Solomon, Assistant General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, was on the brief, for appellee. Mr. Richard M. Zwolinksi, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission also entered an appearance for respondent.

Mr. Ambrose Doskow, New York City, of the bar of the Court of Appeals of New York, pro hac vice, by special leave of court, with whom Mr. Leon R. Brooks, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for intervenor Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.

Messrs. Bernard Koteen and Alan Y. Naftalin, Washington, D. C., were on the brief for intervenor 220 Television, Inc.

Messrs. James A. McKenna, Jr. and Vernon L. Wilkinson, Washington, D. C., were on the brief for intervenor Broadcast House, Inc.

Mr. William C. Koplovitz, Washington, D. C., entered an appearance for intervenor KWK, Inc.

Before EDGERTON, Chief Judge, and WILBUR K. MILLER and BURGER, Circuit Judges.

Certiorari Denied November 17, 1958. See 79 S.Ct. 154.

BURGER, Circuit Judge.

The Commission held a comparative hearing to determine which of five applicants should receive a construction permit for channel 11 in St. Louis. The applicants were (1) Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.; (2) 220 Television, Inc.; (3) St. Louis Telecast, Inc.; (4) Broadcast House, Inc.; and (5) appellant. Appellant ceased its active participation at an early stage, anticipating...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases