Verizon Communications Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission | |
---|---|
Argued October 10, 2001 Decided May 13, 2002 | |
Full case name | Verizon Communications Inc., et al. v. Federal Communications Commission, et al.; WorldCom, Inc., et al. v. Verizon Communications Inc., et al.; Federal Communications Commission, et al. v. Iowa Utilities Board, et al.; AT&T Corporation v. Iowa Utilities Board, et al.; General Communications, Inc. v. Iowa Utilities Board, et al. |
Citations | 535 U.S. 467 (more) 122 S. Ct. 1646; 152 L. Ed. 2d 701; 2002 U.S. LEXIS 3559; 70 U.S.L.W. 4396; 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4078; 2002 Daily Journal DAR 5139; 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 233 |
Holding | |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. The FCC can require state commissions to set the rates charged by incumbents for leased elements on a forward-looking basis untied to the incumbents’ investment | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Souter, joined by Rehnquist, Stevens, Kennedy, Ginsburg; Scalia, Thomas (part III); Thomas (part IV) |
Concur/dissent | Breyer, joined by Scalia (part VI) |
O'Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. |
Verizon Communications Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 535 U.S. 467 (2002), is a United States Supreme Court case in which Verizon Communications argued that the FCC had an unreasonable way for setting rates for leasing network elements. It held that the FCC can require state commissions to set the rates charged by incumbents for leased elements on a forward-looking basis untied to the incumbents' investment and that the FCC can require incumbents to combine elements of their networks at the request of entrants.[1]
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search