U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1961

Farrell McKean D/b as Business and Professional Telephone Exchanges v. Federal Communications Commission, Mobilfone, Inc., Intervenor

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided April 27, 1961 · Miller, Prettyman, Burger

295 F.2d 135; 111 U.S. App. D.C. 148; 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 4685 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. Michael H. Bader, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Andrew G. Haley, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant. Mr. J. Roger Wollenberg, Washington, D. C., also entered an appearance for appellant., Mr. Edward W. Hautanen, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, with whom Mr. Max D. Paglin, General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, was on the brief, for appellee. Mr. Daniel R. Ohlbaum, Asst. General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, also entered an appearance for appellee., Mr. Jeremiah Courtney, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Arthur Blooston, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for intervenor.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

United States v. Austin (District Court, D. New Mexico 1985)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner applied for a radio frequency for a one-way coded message paging service. After a comparative hearing, the trial examiner recommended an award of the frequency to the petitioner. In so doing he relied upon petitioner’s lower rates and the increased competition which would result from his selection. *136 The Commission rejected the examiner’s recommendation and awarded the frequency to the intervenor, who offers transmission of literal rather than coded messages. In the Commission’s view the advantages of the type of service proposed by intervenor outweighed the other considerations. “The choice between the applicants had to be and was made after comparison of all pertinent factors * *. [W]e cannot find that the Commission’s decision was arbitrary, capricious or unsupported by substantial evidence.” Mc-Clatchy Broadcasting Co. v. F. C. C., 1956, 99 U.S.App.D.C. 195, 199, 239 F.2d 15, 19, certiorari denied Sacramento Telecasters, Inc., v. McClatchy Broadcasting Co., 1957, 353 U.S. 918, 77 S.Ct. 662, 1 L.Ed.2d 665.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.