Your World of Legal Intelligence
 United States | 1-800-335-6202

Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. F.C.C., s. 97-2618

Document Cited authorities 24 Cited in 29 Precedent Map Related
Vincent
Decision Date19 August 1998
Docket Number97-2873,97-2866,97-2875,97-3271,97-2661,97-2856,Nos. 97-2618,97-2877,97-3012,s. 97-2618
Citation153 F.3d 523
PartiesSOUTHWESTERN 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; Teleco Communications Group, Inc.; Excel Telecommunications, Inc.; Bell Atlantic Telephone Companies; Time Warner Communications Holdings, Inc.; MCI Telecommunications Corporation; New York Telephone; New England Telephone and Telegraph Company, Intervenors on Appeal, America's Carriers Telecommunication Association, Intervenors on Appeal, Commercial Internet Exchange Association, Amicus Curiae. GTE Midwest, Incorporated, Petitioner, THE SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE COMPANY; U S West, Inc.; Ameritech Corporation; Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel; United States Telephone Association; Southwestern Bell Telephone Company; Rural Telephone Coalition; Cincinnati Bell Telephone Company; Missouri Public Service Commission; Pacific Bell; Nevada Bell, Intervenors on Appeal, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICA
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

Page 523

153 F.3d 523

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; Teleco Communications

Group, Inc.; Excel Telecommunications, Inc.; Bell Atlantic

Telephone Companies; Time Warner Communications Holdings,

Inc.; MCI Telecommunications Corporation; New York

Telephone; New England Telephone and Telegraph Company,

Intervenors on Appeal,

America's Carriers Telecommunication Association,

Intervenors on Appeal,

Commercial Internet Exchange Association, Amicus Curiae.

GTE Midwest, Incorporated, Petitioner,

THE SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE COMPANY; U S West, Inc.;

Ameritech Corporation; Texas Office of Public Utility

Counsel; United States Telephone Association; Southwestern

Bell Telephone Company; Rural Telephone Coalition;

Cincinnati Bell Telephone Company; Missouri Public Service

Commission; Pacific Bell; Nevada Bell, Intervenors on Appeal, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of America,

Respondents,

American Telephone and Telegraph Company;

Telecommunications Resellers Association; The Competition

Policy Institute; Excel Telecommunications, Inc.; Telco

Communications Group, Inc.; Sprint Corporation; WorldCom,

Inc.; Ad Hoc Telecommunications Users Committee; Internet

Access Coalition; National Cable Television Association,

Inc.; Information Technology Association of America;

Association for Local Telecommunications Services; Bell

Atlantic Telephone Companies; Time Warner Communications

Holdings, Inc.; MCI Telecommunications Corporation; New

York Telephone; New England Telephone and Telegraph

Company, Intervenors on Appeal,

America's Carriers Telecommunication Association,

Intervenors on Appeal,

Commercial Internet Exchange Association, Amicus Curiae.

Bell Atlantic-Virginia, Incorporated, Petitioner,

SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE COMPANY; Ameritech

Corporation; Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel; United

States Telephone Association; Southwestern Bell Telephone

Company; U S West, Inc.; Rural Telephone Coalition; Bell

Atlantic Telephone Companies; 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 Northwest, Incorporated; GTE

Hawaiian Telephone Company, Incorporated; GTE West Coast,

Incorporated; Contel of Minnesota, Inc.; Contel of the

South, Inc.; Missouri Public Service Commission; Pacific

Bell; Nevada Bell, Intervenors on Appeal, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of America,

Respondents,

The Competition Policy Institute; America's Carriers

Telecommunication Association; Excel Telecommunications,

Inc.; Telco Communications Group, Inc.; Sprint

Corporation; WorldCom, Inc.; Ad Hoc Telecommunications

Users Committee; Internet Access Coalition; National Cable

Television Association, Inc.; Information Technology

Association of America; American Telephone and Telegraph

Company; Association for Local Telecommunications Services;

Telecommunications Resellers Association; Time Warner

Communications Holdings, Inc.; MCI Telecommunications

Corporation, Intervenors on Appeals

Commercial Internet Exchange Association, Amicus Curiae.

Cable & Wireless, Inc., Petitioner,

COMPETITIVE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION; America's

Carriers Telecommunication Association; Excel

Telecommunications, Inc.; Telco Communications Group, Inc.;

WorldCom, Inc.; Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel;

Telecommunications Resellers Association; Missouri Public

Service Commission, Intervenors on Appeal, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of America,

Respondents,

The Competition Policy Institute; Ameritech Corporation;

Sprint Corporation; Ad Hoc Telecommunications Users

Committee; Internet Access Coalition; National Cable

Television Association, Inc.; Information Technology

Association of America; Southwestern Bell Telephone

Company; American Telephone and Telegraph Company;

Association for Local Telecommunications Services; U S West,

Inc.; Rural Telephone Coalition; Southern New England

Telephone Company; Bell Atlantic Telephone Companies;

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

Northwest, Incorporated; GTE Hawaiian Telephone Company,

Incorporated; GTE West Coast, Incorporated; Contel of

Minnesota, Inc.; Contel of the South, Inc.; Time Warner

Communications Holdings, Inc.; Pacific Bell; Nevada Bell;

BellSouth Corporation; BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.;

New York Telephone Company; New England Telephone and

Telegraph Company, Intervenors on Appeal,

Commercial Internet Exchange Association, Amicus Curiae.

MCI Telecommunications Corporation; Petitioner,

TELECOMMUNICATIONS RESELLERS ASSOCIATION; Allied Associated

Partners, LP; GELD Information Systems; Competitive

Telecommunications Association; America's Carriers

Telecommunication Association; Excel Telecommunications,

Inc.; Telco Communications Group, Inc.; WorldCom, Inc.;

Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel; Cable & Wireless,

Inc.; Frontier Corporation; Missouri Public Service

Commission, Intervenors on Appeal, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of America,

Respondents,

Association for Local Telecommunications Services; American

Telephone and Telegraph Company; The Competition Policy

Institute; Ameritech Corporation; Sprint Corporation; Ad

Hoc Telecommunications Users Committee; Internet Access

Coalition; National Cable Television Association, Inc.;

Information Technology Association of America; Southwestern

Bell Telephone Company, U S West, Inc.; Rural Telephone

Coalition; Southern New England Telephone Company; Bell

Atlantic Telephone Companies; 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 Northwest, Incorporated; GTE

Hawaiian Telephone Company, Incorporated; GTE West Coast,

Incorporated; Contel of Minnesota; Contel of the South;

Time Warner Communications Holdings, Inc.; Pacific Bell;

Nevada Bell; BellSouth Corporation; BellSouth

Telecommunications, Inc.; New York Telephone Company; New

England Telephone and Telegraph Company, Intervenors on Appeal,

Commercial Internet Exchange Association, Amicus Curiae.

U S West, Inc., Petitioner,

SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE COMPANY; Ameritech

Corporation; Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel; United

States Telephone Association; Southwestern Bell Telephone

Company; Rural Telephone Coalition; Bell Atlantic Telephone

Companies; 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 Northwest, Incorporated; GTE Hawaiian

Telephone Company, Incorporated; GTE West Coast,

Incorporated; Contel of Minnesota, Inc.; Contel of the

South, Inc.; Missouri Public Service Commission; Pacific

Bell; Nevada Bell, Intervenors on Appeal, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of America,

Respondents,

American Telephone and Telegraph Company; The Competition

Policy Institute; Excel Telecommunications, Inc.; Telco Communications Group, Inc.; Sprint Corporation; WorldCom Inc.; Ad Hoc Telecommunications Users Committee; Internet Access Coalition; National Cable Television Association Inc.; Information Technology Association of America Association for Local Telecommunications Services Telecommunications Resellers Association; Bell Atlantic-Washington, D.C.; Time Warner Communications Holdings, Inc.; MCI Telecommunications Corporation; New York Telephone Company; New England Telephone and Telegraph Company, Intervenors on Appeal America's Carriers Telecommunication Association Intervenors on Appeal, Commercial Internet Exchange Association, Amicus Curiae. LCI International Telecom Corporation, Petitioner, COMPETITIVE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION; America's Carriers Telecommunication Association; Excel Telecommunications, Inc.; Telco Communications Group, Inc.; WorldCom, Inc.; Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel; Telecommunications Resellers Association; Missouri Public Service Commission, Intervenors on Appeal, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of America, Respondents, The Competition Policy Institute; Ameritech Corporation; Sprint Corporation; Ad Hoc Telecommunications Users Committee; Internet Access Coalition; ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
34 cases
  • Smith v. Rasmussen, C97-3055-MWB.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa
    • July 14, 1999
    ... ...          California v. FCC, 124 F.3d 934, 943 (8th Cir.1997) (quoting Missouri v ... 1507, 18 L.Ed.2d 681 (1967)); see also Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. FCC, 153 F.3d 523, 556 (8th Cir.1998) ... ...
  • Rubashkin v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa
    • January 20, 2016
  • Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Combs
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • October 28, 2008
    ... ... The FCC's rules required LECs to record their revenues in accordance with specified accounting rules and deposit accounts, determine what fraction of the ... ...
  • Rural Iowa Independ. Tele. Ass'n v. Iowa Utilities
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Iowa
    • August 11, 2005
    ... 385 F.Supp.2d 797 ... RURAL IOWA INDEPENDENT TELEPHONE ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff, ... IOWA UTILITIES BOARD, ... "RIITA challenges the IUB's interpretation of [an FCC] order, ... [and] district courts have jurisdiction to ... 1753, 152 L.Ed.2d 871 (2002), and Pac. Bell v. Pac-West Telecomm., Inc., 325 F.3d 1114, 1125 (9th ... as [their] product to [their] customers." Southwestern Bell, 153 F.3d at 542 n. 9. 32 ... ...
    • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
  • A common carrier approach to Internet interconnection.
    • United States
    • Federal Communications Law Journal Vol. 54 No. 2, March 2002
    • March 1, 2002
    ...First Report and Order, 12 F.C.C.R. 15982, 15990-94, 7 Comm. Reg. (P & F) 1209, 1220-23 (1997), aff'd Southwestern Bell Tel. v. FCC, 153 F.3d 523 (8th Cir. 1998), subsequent history omitted [hereinafter Access Charge (6.) See 47 U.S.C. [section] 251(b)(5) (Supp. V 1999); Implementation ......
  • From international competitive carrier to the WTO: a survey of the FCC's international telecommunications policy initiatives 1985-1998.
    • United States
    • Federal Communications Law Journal Vol. 51 No. 2, March - March 1999
    • March 1, 1999
    ...maintaining their retail rates at the higher price and risk losing market share. Id. para. 277. (57.) Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. FCC, 153 F.3d 523, 554 (8th Cir. 1998). (58.) Cable & Wireless, 1999 WL 7824, at *10. Of course, the great unanswered question is from which economics horn......
  • Making and keeping regulatory promises.
    • United States
    • Federal Communications Law Journal Vol. 55 No. 1, December 2002
    • December 1, 2002
    ...Access Charge Reform, First Report and Order, 12 F.C.C.R. 15982, 7 Comm. Reg. (P & F) 1209 (1997), aff'd sub nom. S.W. Bell v. FCC, 153 F.3d 523 (8th Cir. 1998) [hereinafter Access Charge Reform First Report and (114.) CALLS Plan, supra note 107, paras. 19-20. (115.) Price Cap Performan......
  • Cap-sized: how the promise of the price cap voyage to competition was lost in a sea of good intentions.
    • United States
    • Federal Communications Law Journal Vol. 51 No. 2, March - March 1999
    • March 1, 1999
    ...it to do so. See Access Charge Reform First Report and Order, supra note 99, paras. 29-32, aff'd, Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. FCC, 153 F.3d 523 (8th Cir. (220.) See, e.g., Expanded Interconnection with Local Telephone Company Facilities, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 9 F.C.C.R. 5154, 75 R......
1 provisions
  • Pennsylvania Bulletin, Vol 49, No. 09. March 2, 2019
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Register
    • Invalid date
    ...Ruling Filed by the BellSouth Corporation, 7 FCC Rcd 1619, 1620, ¶ 7 (1992) (BellSouth MemoryCall); Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. FCC, 153 F.3d 523, 543 (8th Cir. Treatment of Mixed-Use Services Mixed-use or jurisdictionally-mixed services are gener- ally subject to dual federal/state juris......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT