Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC

Decision Date27 October 1967
Docket NumberNo. 20924.,20924.
Citation385 F.2d 979,128 US App. DC 197
PartiesHUBBARD BROADCASTING, INC., Petitioner, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents, Santa Fe Cablevision Company, Intervenor.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit

Mr. Robert L. Heald, Washington, D. C., with whom Messrs. Frank U. Fletcher and Edward W. Hummers, Jr., Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for petitioner.

Mr. Joseph A. Marino, Counsel, F.C.C., with whom Asst. Atty. Gen., Donald F. Turner, Mr. Henry Geller, Gen. Counsel, Mrs. Lenore G. Ehrig, Counsel, F.C.C., and Mr. Howard E. Shapiro, Atty., Dept. of Justice, were on the brief, for respondents. Mr. John H. Conlin, Associate Gen. Counsel, F.C.C., also entered an appearance for respondent Federal Communications Commission.

Mr. Vernon L. Wilkinson, Washington, D. C., with whom Messrs. James A. McKenna, Jr. and Robert W. Coll, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for intervenor.

Before WILBUR K. MILLER, Senior Circuit Judge, and WRIGHT and McGOWAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This is a petition for review of a memorandum opinion and order of the Federal Communications Commission released February 17, 1967. In its opinion and order, the Commission waived the evidentiary hearing provisions of Section 74.1107 of its Rules and Regulations pertaining to CATV, 47 C.F.R. § 74.1107 (Supp.1967), and permitted Santa Fe Cablevision to carry its proposed distant signals within the Grade A contours of Station KOB-TV, operated by petitioner, Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc., in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Hubbard maintains that, in granting the waiver, the Commission violated its own rules requiring an evidentiary hearing except where the uncontested factual allegations in the application for waiver and the Commission's findings satisfy the public interest consideration for CATV approval.

This case is governed by our recent decision in Channel 9 Syracuse, Inc. v. F.C.C., 128 U.S.App.D.C. ___, 385 F.2d 969 (Nos. 20,843 and 20,915, decided September 26, 1967). Both cases were considered by the Commission at approximately the same time and raise similar questions as to factual specificity in petitions for waiver and the articulation by the Commission of its reasons for granting the petitions. The differences in the cases are a matter of degree, and we do not find the degree of difference sufficient to justify a different result. Accordingly, we...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • United States v. Southwestern Cable Co Midwest Television, Inc v. Southwestern Cable Co, s. 363
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • June 10, 1968
    ...even as far as Dayton.'17 And see Chan- nel 9 Syracuse, Inc. v. F.C.C., 128 U.S.App.D.C. 187, 385 F.2d 969; Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. v. F.C.C., 128 U.S.App.D.C. 197, 385 F.2d 979. Thus, 'while the CATV industry originated in sparsely settled areas and areas of adverse terrain * * * it is ......
  • Indiana Broadcasting Corporation (WANE-TV) v. FCC, 20833
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • December 5, 1968
    ...C.F.R. § 74.1109(a). See also Channel 9 Syracuse, Inc. v. FCC, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 187, 385 F.2d 969 (1967); Hubbard Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 197, 385 F.2d 979 (1967). 8 47 C.F.R. § 74.1107(a) (1968), quoted supra note 9 "No CATV system, located so as to fall outside the provi......
  • Titusville Cable TV, Inc. v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • December 23, 1968
    ...have presented. Channel 9 Syracuse, Inc. v. F.C.C., 128 U.S.App. D.C. 187, 385 F.2d 969 (1967); Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. v. F.C.C., 128 U.S. App.D.C. 197, 385 F.2d 979 (1967). Titusville submitted to the Commission an engineer's affidavit which concedes that there was no evidence of mater......
  • Paducah Newspapers, Inc. v. FCC
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • June 30, 1969
    ...5, 1968); Cedar Rapids Television Co. (KCRG-TV) v. FCC, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 270, 387 F.2d 228 (1967); Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 197, 385 F.2d 979 (1967); Channel 9 Syracuse, Inc. v. FCC, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 187, 385 F.2d 969 (1967). See also United States v. Southwestern......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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