Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Messrs. Leonard H. Marks, Washington, D.C., and Paul Dobin, Washington, D.C., for appellant. Mr. Richard A. Solomon, Assistant General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, with whom Messrs. Warren E. Baker, General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, J. Smith Henley, Asst. General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, and Daniel R. Ohlbaum, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, were on the brief, for appellee. Mr. Stanley S. Neustadt, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, New York City, also entered an appearance for appellee. Messrs. Paul A. Porter, Harry M. Plotkin and Reed Miller, Washington, D.C., filed a brief for intervenor. Mr. George Bunn, Washington, D.C., also entered an appearance for intervenor.
Judges
  • Henry White Edgerton
  • Wilbur Kingsbury Miller
  • George Thomas Washington
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Messrs. Leonard H. Marks, Washington, D.C., and Paul Dobin, Washington, D.C., for appellant. Mr. Richard A. Solomon, Assistant General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, with whom Messrs. Warren E. Baker, General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, J. Smith Henley, Asst. General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, and Daniel R. Ohlbaum, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, were on the brief, for appellee. Mr. Stanley S. Neustadt, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, New York City, also entered an appearance for appellee. Messrs. Paul A. Porter, Harry M. Plotkin and Reed Miller, Washington, D.C., filed a brief for intervenor. Mr. George Bunn, Washington, D.C., also entered an appearance for intervenor.
Judges
  • Henry White Edgerton
  • Wilbur Kingsbury Miller
  • George Thomas Washington
See more information ...
Smart Summary

SOUTHSIDE VIRGINIA TELECASTING CORPORATION, Appellant, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Appellee, Petersburg Tele

PER CURIAM.

The appellant and the intervenor each applied to the Federal Communications Commission for a construction permit for a television station in Petersburg, Virginia. After a comparative hearing the Commission denied the appellant's application and granted the intervenor's. We do not find that the Commission ignored factors that required consideration or acted arbitrarily in choosing between the applicants.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.
Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Comments

SOUTHSIDE VIR. TELECASTING v. FED. COMMUN
(Dec 29, 1955)