WORZ, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 358 U.S. 55 (1958). · Go Syfert
Search
WORZ, Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 358 U.S. 55 (1958). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
67 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 20 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Western Energy Co. v. Genie Land Co. (mont, 1987-05-22)
Treatment trajectory · 1958 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1958 1992 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Western Energy Co. v. Genie Land Co.
Mont. · 1987 · confidence medium
The statute does not bear the requisite “substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare.” Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. (1926), 272 U.S. 365, 395 , 47 *79 S.Ct. 114, 121, 71 L.Ed. 303, 314 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Edelbeck v. Town of Theresa (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Wis. · 1973 · confidence medium
X-XX-X-XX (1972). [8] See e.g., Yorkville v. Fonk (1958), 3 Wis. 2d 371 , 88 N. W. 2d 319 , certiorari denied, 358 U. S. 58 , 79 Sup. Ct. 110, 3 L.
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Gonzalo De Jesus Tamayo
11th Cir. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
See Shargaa v. State, 102 So.2d 809, 813 (Fla.) (holding that entry in clerk's minutes is the best evidence of the entry of a judgment and is preferred to a judicially signed judgment), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 873 , 79 S.Ct. 114 , 3 L.Ed.2d 104 (1958). 12 .
cited Cited "see" State v. Lach
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1995 · signal: see · confidence high
See Shargaa v. State, 102 So.2d 809 (Fla.), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 873 , 79 S.Ct. 114 , 3 L.Ed.2d 104 (1958).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Rodriguez
Fla. · 1991 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord Shargaa v. State, 102 So.2d 809 (Fla.) (the presumption of innocence is destroyed when jurors learn of previous convictions for unrelated felonies), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 873 , 79 S.Ct. 114 , 3 L.Ed.2d 104 (1958).
examined Cited "see" City of Angels Broadcasting, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Fidelity Television, Inc., Rko General, Inc., Intervenors (6×)
D.C. Cir. · 1984 · signal: see · confidence high
See WORZ, Inc. v. FCC, 358 U.S. 55 , 79 S.Ct. 114 , 3 L.Ed.2d 48 (1958).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Zeimer (2×)
Utah · 1960 · signal: see · confidence high
See Shargaa v. State, Fla., 102 So.2d 814 , certiorari denied 358 U.S. 873 , 79 S.Ct. 114 , 3 L.Ed.2d 104 . .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Michael J. Drayton
11th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see also · confidence low
Finch v. Mayo, 137 Fla. 762 , 189 So. 27 (1939); State v. Loch, 651 So.2d 695, 699 (Fla.2d D.C.A.), rev. denied, 659 So.2d 1087 (1995); see also Shargaa v. State, 102 So.2d 809, 812 (Fla.), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 873 , 79 S.Ct. 114 , 3 L.Ed.2d 104 (1958).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Doxsee Sea Clam Co., Inc. v. Christian Brown
2d Cir. · 1994 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., In re Allen N. Spooner & Sons, Inc., 253 F.2d 584, 586 (2d Cir.), cert. dismissed, 358 U.S. 30 , 79 S.Ct. 9 , 3 L.Ed.2d 48 (1958); In re Spearin, Preston & Burrows, Inc. (“Lavinia D.”), 190 F.2d 684, 686 (2d Cir.1951); Complaint of Okeanos Ocean Research Found., Inc., 704 F.Supp. 412, 414 (S.D.N.Y.1989).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." In Re Loyd W. Richardson Construction Co.
S.D. Tex. · 1993 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also In re Oceanic Fleet, Inc., 807 F.Supp. 1261, 1262 (E.D.La.1992) (examining factors such as notice of the alleged injury, the date and place on which it occurred, and “the adversary nature of the situation”). “[A] writing may constitute sufficient notice of claim even if it is couched in tentative terms, referring only to the ‘possibility’ of legal action.” In re Complaint of Bayview Charter Boats, Inc., 692 F.Supp. 1480, 1485 (E.D.N.Y.1988) (paraphrasing holding of In re Petition of Allen N. Spooner & Sons, Inc., 253 F.2d 584, 586 (2d Cir.), cert, dismissed, 358 U.S. 30 , …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
WORZ, INC.,
v.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Et Al.
349.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 27, 1958.
358 U.S. 55
Eliot C. Lovett for petitioner., Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Hansen, Charles H. Weston, John L. Fitzgerald and Richard A. Solomon for the Federal Communications Commission, respondent.
Clark.
Cited by 11 opinions  |  Published

Lead Opinion

Per Curiam.

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. In view of the representations in the Solicitor General’s brief on pages 4 and 5, concerning testimony given before the Subcommittee on Legislative Oversight of the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce subsequent to the decision by the Court of Appeals in this case, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for such action as it may deem appropriate.

Dissent

Mr. Justice Clark and Mr. Justice Harlan

dissent. The matters referred to by the Court were not presented in the Court of Appeals and are not presented by this petition. Agreeing with the Solicitor General that denial[*56] of the petition for writ of certiorari would not foreclose appropriate consideration thereof by the Court of Appeals, we see no reason for vacating the Court of Appeals’ judgment and, therefore, dissent from this disposition of the matter by the Court.