Home/Eighth Circuit/Iowa Utilities Board v. F.C.C.

Iowa Utilities Board v. F.C.C.

120 F.3d 753
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedOctober 14, 1997
Docket96-3519
StatusPublished
Cited by31 cases

This text of 120 F.3d 753 (Iowa Utilities Board v. F.C.C.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Iowa Utilities Board v. F.C.C., 120 F.3d 753 (8th Cir. 1997).

Opinion

120 F.3d 753

67 USLW 3153, 1997-2 Trade Cases P 71,876,
8 Communications Reg. (P&F) 1179

IOWA UTILITIES BOARD, Petitioner,
Bell Atlantic Corporation; Bellsouth Corporation; Pacific
Telesis Group; SBC Communications, Inc.; Maryland Public
Service Commission; US West, Inc.; US Telephone
Association; Arkansas Public Service Commission; ALLTEL
Telephone Services Corporation; Ameritech Corporation;
Oregon Public Utility Commission; North State Telephone
Company; Western Alliance; Independent Telephone and
Telecommunications Alliance; Roseville Telephone Company;
Concord Telephone Company; Rock Hill Telephone Company;
Public Utilities Commission of the State of Hawaii;
American Public Communications Council, Inc.; ICG Telecom
Group, Inc.; Minnesota Public Utilities Commission;
Southern New England Telephone Company; The Ad Hoc
Coalition of Telecommunications Manufacturing Companies;
Pacific Telecom, Inc.; Minnesota Independent Coalition;
Kentucky Public Service Commission; Kansas Corporation
Commission; Public Service Commission of the State of
Wyoming; Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission; Public
Service Commission of Wisconsin; State of Texas; Alabama
Public Service Commission; Citizens Telephone Company of
Kecksburg; New Mexico State Corporation Commission; Public
Service Commission of the State of Montana; GTE Service
Corporation; Utah Department of Commerce, Division of
Public Utilities; Public Service Commission of Utah;
Public Service Commission of the State of South Carolina;
Tennessee Regulatory Authority; Aging Forum, Inc., doing
business as National Silver Haired Congress; U.S. Coalition
on Aging; College for Living; Council of Silver Haired
Legislatures; Missouri Alliance of Area Agencies on Aging;
Missouri Association for the Deaf; Missouri Council of the
Blind; Presidents' Club for Telecommunications Justice;
Paraquad, Rural Advocates for Independent Living; Services
for Independent Living; Public Utilities Commission of the
State of Colorado; Department of Public Utilities of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts; Oklahoma Corporation
Commission; Public Service Commission of the State of
Connecticut, Department of Public Utility Control; New York
Telephone Company; New England Telephone and Telegraph
Company, Intervenors on Appeal,
v.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of
America, Respondents,
AT&T Corp.; Competitive Telecommunications Association;
MFS Communications Company, Inc.; Airtouch Communications,
Inc.; Nextlink Communications, L.L.C.; Sprint Spectrum,
L.P.; National Cable Television Association, Inc.; MCI
Telecommunications Corporation; Sprint Corp.; Cox
Communications, Inc.; Vanguard Cellular Systems, Inc.;
Western Wireless Corporation; American Communications
Services, Inc.; KMC Telecom, Inc.; The Competition Policy
Institute; Association for Local Telecommunications
Services; Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association;
GST Telecom, Inc.; ACC Corp.; General Communication,
Inc.; Telecommunications Resellers Association; Consumer
Federation of America; Ad Hoc Telecommunications Users
Committee; Information Technology Industry Council;
America's Carriers Telecommunication Association; Jones
Intercable, Inc.; Telecommunications, Inc.; Teleport
Communications Group, Inc.; Rural Telecommunications Group;
Allied Associated Partners; Geld Information Systems;
Pronet, Inc.; Winstar Communications, Inc.; U.S. One
Communications Services; Comcast Corporation; Frontier
Corporation; Anaheim, California Public Utilities
Department; City of Long Beach, California; City of
Manassas, Virginia; Cable & Wireless, Inc.; National
Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates; Time
Warner Communications Holdings, Inc.; Personal
Communications Industry Association; Excel
Telecommunications, Inc.; Paging Network, Inc.; Nextwave
Telecom, Inc.; Small Cable Business Association; Worldcom,
Inc.; Metrocall, Inc.; Texas Office of Public Utility
Counsel, Intervenors on Appeal,
Consumers' Utility Counsel Division, Georgia Governor's
Office of Consumer Affairs; Honorable John D. Dingell;
Honorable W.J. (Billy) Tauzin; Honorable Rick Boucher;
Honorable Dennis Hastert, Amici on Behalf of Petitioner,
Honorable Thomas J. Bliley, Jr.; Honorable Ernest F.
Hollings; Honorable Ted Stevens; Honorable Daniel K.
Inouye; Honorable Trent Lott; Honorable Edward J. Markey,
Amici on Behalf of Respondent.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGULATORY UTILITY COMMISSIONERS, Petitioner,
Bell Atlantic Corporation; Bellsouth Corporation; Pacific
Telesis Group; SBC Communications, Inc.; Maryland Public
Service Commission; US West, Inc.; US Telephone
Association; Arkansas Public Service Commission; ALLTEL
Telephone Services Corporation; Oregon Public Utility
Commission; North State Telephone Company; Western
Alliance; Independent Telephone and Telecommunications
Alliance; Roseville Telephone Company; Concord Telephone
Company; Rock Hill Telephone Company; Public Utilities
Commission of the State of Hawaii; American Public
Communications Council, Inc.; ICG Telecom Group, Inc.;
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission; Southern New England
Telephone Company; The Ad Hoc Coalition of
Telecommunications Manufacturing Companies; Pacific
Telecom, Inc.; Minnesota Independent Coalition; Kentucky
Public Service Commission; Kansas Corporation Commission;
Public Service Commission of the State of Wyoming; Rhode
Island Public Utilities Commission; Public Service
Commission of Wisconsin; State of Texas; Alabama Public
Service Commission; Citizens Telephone Company of
Kecksburg; New Mexico State Corporation Commission; Public
Service Commission of the State of Montana; GTE Service
Corporation; Utah Department of Commerce, Division of
Public Utilities; Public Service Commission of Utah;
Public Service Commission of the State of South Carolina;
Tennessee Regulatory Authority; Aging Forum, Inc., doing
business as National Silver Haired Congress; U.S. Coalition
on Aging; College for Living; Council of Silver Haired
Legislatures; Missouri Alliance of Area Agencies on Aging;
Missouri Association for the Deaf; Missouri Council of the
Blind; Presidents' Club for Telecommunications Justice;
Paraquad, Rural Advocates for Independent Living; Services
for Independent Living; Public Utilities Commission of the
State of Colorado; Department of Public Utilities of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts; Oklahoma Corporation
Commission; Public Service Commission of the State of
Connecticut, Department of Public Utility Control; New York
Telephone Company; New England Telephone and Telegraph
Company, Intervenors on Appeal,
v.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; United States of
America, Respondents,
AT&T Corp.; Competitive Telecommunications Association;
MFS Communications Company, Inc.; Airtouch Communications,
Inc.; Nextlink Communications, L.L.C.; Sprint Spectrum,
L.P.; National Cable Television Association, Inc.; MCI
Telecommunications Corporation; Sprint Corp.; Cox
Communications, Inc.; Vanguard Cellular Systems, Inc.;
Western Wireless Corporation; American Communications
Services, Inc.; KMC Telecom, Inc.; The Competition Policy
Institute; Association for Local Telecommunications
Services; Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association;

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

PARKER v. NEW JERSEY MOTOR VEHICLE COMMISSION
D. New Jersey, 2020
Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate of the Lake Traverse Reservation v. United States Corps of Engineers
918 F. Supp. 2d 962 (D. South Dakota, 2013)
WorldNet Telecommunications, Inc. v. Puerto Rico Telephone Co.
497 F.3d 1 (First Circuit, 2007)
Union Telephone Co. v. Wyoming Public Service Commission
2006 WY 110 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2006)
In Re Qwest's Wholesale Service Quality Standards
702 N.W.2d 246 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 2005)
In Re Qwest's Wholesale Service Quality Standards
678 N.W.2d 58 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 2004)
Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc. v. Mcimetro Access Transmission Services, Inc.
317 F.3d 1270 (Eleventh Circuit, 2003)
In Re Verizon New England, Inc.
795 A.2d 1196 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 2002)
BellSouth Telecommunications v. MCImetro Access
278 F.3d 1223 (Eleventh Circuit, 2002)
In Re PSC
619 N.W.2d 809 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2000)
Nebraska Public Service Commission v. Aliant Midwest
619 N.W.2d 809 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2000)
Verizon North, Inc. v. Strand
140 F. Supp. 2d 803 (W.D. Michigan, 2000)
MCI Telecommunications Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, and MCI Metro Access Transmission Services, Incorporated, a Delaware Corporation, and United States of America and Federal Communications Commission, Intervenors-Appellees v. Illinois Bell Telephone Company, Doing Business as Ameritech Illinois, Incorporated, and Illinois Commerce Commission, Terry Harvill, Ruth K. Kretschmer, in Their Official Capacities as Commissioners of the Illinois Commerce Commission and Not as Individuals, Wisconsin Bell, Incorporated, Doing Business as Ameritech Wisconsin v. Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, Cheryl L. Parrino, in Her Official Capacity as a Member of the Commission, Daniel J. Eastman, in His Official Capacity as a Member of the Commission, Wisconsin Bell, Incorporated, Doing Business as Ameritech Wisconsin v. Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, Cheryl L. Parrino and Joseph P. Mettner, Commissioners of the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Bell, Incorporated, Doing Business as Ameritech Wisconsin v. Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, Cheryl L. Parrino, Daniel J. Eastman, MCI Metro Access Transmission Services, Incorporated, and MCI Telecommunications Corporation v. Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, Cheryl L. Parrino, Daniel J. Eastman, in Their Official Capacities as Members of the Commission, Wisconsin Bell, Incorporated, Doing Business as Ameritech Wisconsin v. Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, Cheryl L. Parrino, Daniel J. Eastman, and United States of America, Intervenor-Appellant
222 F.3d 323 (Seventh Circuit, 2000)
MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. Illinois Bell Telephone Co.
222 F.3d 323 (Seventh Circuit, 2000)
MCI Telecommunicatio v. IL Commerce Commissi
Seventh Circuit, 2000
Iowa Utilities Board v. FCC
Eighth Circuit, 2000
Iowa Utilities Board v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America
219 F.3d 744 (Eighth Circuit, 2000)
Bell Atlantic-Delaware, Inc. v. McMahon
80 F. Supp. 2d 218 (D. Delaware, 2000)
Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Connect Communications
72 F. Supp. 2d 1043 (E.D. Arkansas, 1999)
At & T Communications of the Southwest, Inc. v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
86 F. Supp. 2d 932 (W.D. Missouri, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
120 F.3d 753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/iowa-utilities-board-v-fcc-ca8-1997.