SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO. v. F.C.C.

Nos. 97-2618, 97-2661, 97-2856, 97-2866, 97-2873, 97-2875, 97-2877, 97-3012, 97-3271, 97-3272, 97-3274, 97-3477, 97-3557, 97-3720, 97-3389, 97-3576, 97-3663 and 97-4106.

153 F.3d 520 (1998)

SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY; Petitioner, Southern New England Telephone Company; Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel; United States Telephone Association; Ameritech Corporation; U S West, Inc.; Rural Telephone Coalition; Cincinnati Bell Telephone Company; GTE Service Corporation; GTE Alaska, Incorporated; GTE Arkansas Incorporated; GTE California, Incorporated; GTE Florida, Incorporated; GTE Midwest, Incorporated; GTE South, Incorporated; GTE Southwest, Incorporated; GTE North, Incorporated; GTE Hawaiian Telephone Company, Incorporated; GTE West Coast, Incorporated; Contel of Minnesota, Inc.; Contel of the South, Inc.; Missouri Public Service Commission; GTE Northwest, Incorporated; Pacific Bell; Nevada Bell, Intervenors on Appeal. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of America, Respondents. Association for Local Telecommunications Services; American Telephone and Telegraph Company; Telecommunications Resellers Association; The Competition Policy Institute; Information Technology Association of America; National Cable Television Association, Inc.; Internet Access Coalition; Ad Hoc Telecommunications Users Committee; Worldcom, Inc.; Sprint Corporation; Telco Communications Group, Inc.; Excel Telecommunications, Inc.; Bell Atlantic Telephone Companies; Time Warner Communications Holdings, Inc.; MCI Telecommunications Corporation; NY Telephone; New England Telephone and Telegraph Company, Intervenors on Appeal. America's Carriers Telecommunication Association, Intervenors on Appeal, Commercial Internet Exchange Association, Amicus Curiae. SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY; Petitioner, Ameritech Corporation; Time Warner Communications Holdings; US Telephone Association; GTE Service Corporation; GTE Alaska, Incorporated; GTE Arkansas, Incorporated; GTE California, Incorporated; GTE Florida, Incorporated; GTE Midwest, Incorporated; GTE South, Incorporated; GTE Southwest, Incorporated; Benjamin Wayne McCoin, Inc.; GTE Northwest, Incorporated; GTE Hawaiian Telephone Company, Incorporated; GTE West Coast, Incorporated; Contel of Minnesota, Inc.; Contel of the South, Inc.; Association for Local Telecommunications Services; Bell Atlantic-Maryland, Inc.; Bell Atlantic-Washington, D.C., Inc.; Bell Atlantic-West Virginia, Inc.; Bell Atlantic-New Jersey, Inc.; Bell Atlantic-Delaware, Inc.; Bell Atlantic-Pennsylvania, Inc.; Bell Atlantic-Virginia, Inc.; New York Telephone Company; New England Telephone and Telegraph Company; Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance, Intervenors on Appeal. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of America, Respondents. American Telephone and Telegraph Company; Telecommunications Resellers Association; MCI Telecommunications Corporation, LBC Communications, Inc.; Worldcom, Inc.; Competitive Telecommunications Association, Intervenors on Appeal.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

June 5, 1998.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Michael K. Kellogg, Washington, DC, argued, for Bell South.

Mark L. Evans, Washington, DC, argued, Richard G. Taranto, Washington, DC, argued, for Bell Atlantic.

Nory Miller, Washington, DC, argued, for MCI.

Danny E. Adams, Washington, DC, argued, for LCI.

Martha S. Hogerty, Jefferson City, MO, argued, for State Consumers.

Rick Guzman, Austin, TX, argued, for Texas Public Utilities.

Laurence N. Bourne and John E. Ingle, Washington, DC, argued, for FCC.

Gene C. Schaerr, Washington, DC, argued, for AT&T.

Jonathan J. Nadler, Washington, DC, argued, for Information Technology Association.


MEMORANDUM CONCERNING POTENTIAL RECUSAL AND NOTICE OF DECISION

HANSEN, Circuit Judge, in Chambers.

My son, age 23, having recently completed a major in computer science at Cornell College, has accepted a position as an entrylevel computer programmer with MCI Telecommunications Corporation (MCI), one of the named intervenors in these cases, to begin work on June 8, 1998. I place this matter of record because it is the fundamental ethical duty of every judge...

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