Wometco Enterprises, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission

314 F.2d 266
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedJanuary 24, 1963
DocketNos. 17076, 17077
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 314 F.2d 266 (Wometco Enterprises, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wometco Enterprises, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 314 F.2d 266 (D.C. Cir. 1963).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Wometco Enterprises, Inc., is the licensee of a television station at Miami, Florida. WEAT-TV, Inc., intervenor in No. 17,076, and Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co., intervenor in No. 17,077, are respectively licensees of two television stations in West Palm Beach, Florida. Each of the intervenors applied to the Federal Communications Commission for permission to move its transmitter to a point approximately twelve miles southwest of West Palm Beach in the direction of Miami, with additional coverage but without loss of previous coverage.

Wometco petitioned for hearings, under Section 309(e) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 309(e), as to whether the intervenors’ program proposals were designed to and could be expected to serve the public interest by meeting the needs of the area to be served; and whether the proposed site moves would result in a fair, efficient and equitable distribution of television service and would otherwise be consistent with the public interest, convenience and necessity. The Commission rejected Wometco’s petition, and without a hearing granted the applications of the intervenors to move their transmitters. Wometco appeals, saying it had raised substantial issues of fact which required a hearing in each case.

In our opinion, the issues presented by Wometco were so substantial that the Commission erred in disposing of them in a summary manner. The orders of the Commission are set aside and the cases remanded for evidentiary hearings.

So ordered.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
314 F.2d 266, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wometco-enterprises-inc-v-federal-communications-commission-cadc-1963.