NORTH COUNTY COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION OF ARIZONA, a California corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
QWEST CORPORATION, a Colorado corporation, DBA CenturyLink QC; Gary Pierce; Bob Stump; Sandra Kennedy; Paul Newman; Brenda Burns, in their official capacity as Commissioners of the Arizona Corporation Commission, Defendants-Appellees.
North County Communications Corporation of Oregon, a California corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Qwest Corporation, DBA CenturyLink QC, a Colorado corporation; John Savage; Susan Ackerman; Stephen Bloom, in their capacity as Commissioners of the Public Utility Commission of Oregon, Defendants-Appellees.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued and Submitted December 8, 2015 San Francisco, California.
Filed May 31, 2016.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
R. Dale Dixon, Jr. , Law Offices of Dale Dixon, Del Mar, California, argued the cause and filed the briefs for the plaintiff-appellant.
Lawrence H. Reichman , Perkins Coie LLP, Portland, Oregon, argued the cause and filed the brief for the defendant-appellee Qwest Corporation.
Maureen A. Scott , Arizona Corporation Commission, Phoenix, Arizona, argued the cause and filed the brief for the defendants-appellees Gary Pierce, Bob Stump, Sandra Kennedy, Paul Newman, and Brenda Burns, in their capacity as Commissioners of the Arizona Corporation Commission. With her on the brief were Brian E. Smith and Robert W. Geake , Arizona Corporation Commission, Phoenix, Arizona.
Ellen F. Rosenblum , Attorney General, Salem Oregon; Anna M. Joyce , Solicitor General, Salem Oregon; and Michael T. Weirich , Senior Assistant Attorney General, Salem, Oregon, together filed the brief for the defendants-appellees John Savage, Susan Ackerman, and Stephen Bloom, in their capacity as Commissioners of the Public Utility Commission of Oregon.
Before: Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain, Barry G. Silverman, and Carlos T. Bea, Circuit Judges.
OPINION
O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge:
This dispute under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 pits one telephone company against another with two state regulatory Commissions caught in the middle. We must determine whether the matter is subject to binding arbitration, and, if so, what rules apply.
I
These appeals involve...
Let's get started
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.
