green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.8 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case ·
“there is a right to assert a colorable defense of official immunity in a federal forum”
Treatment trajectory · 1975 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1975
2000
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 18 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Bagwell v. Brannum
there is a right to assert a colorable defense of official immunity in a federal forum
cited
Cited "see"
Crum v. Hankook Manufacturing Company, Ltd.
See O’Bryan v. Chandler, 496 F.2d 403, 410 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S. Ct. 245 , 42 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Jerome Thomas Lamprecht v. Federal Communications Commission, Barbara Driscoll Marmet and Dragon Communications, Inc., Intervenors
(2×)
See TV 9, Inc. v. FCC, 495 F.2d 929 (D.C.Cir.1973) (reversing Mid-Florida), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
Shurberg Broadcasting of Hartford, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Astroline Communications Co., Intervenor
(2×)
See TV 9, Inc. v. FCC, 495 F.2d 929 , 937-38 (D.C.Cir.1973), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974); Garrett v. FCC, 513 F.2d 1056, 1062-63 (D.C.Cir.1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
West Michigan Broadcasting Company v. Federal Communications Commission
It also made clear that this relatedness rested on the view that our society benefits from exposure to a broad diversity of ideas and perspectives, a view of the public interest that it derived in large part from the Supreme Court's First Amendment jurisprudence: 9 As the Supreme Court has stated, the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States "rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public." * * * 10 Id. at 394 n. 4 (quoting Associated Press v. United States, 326 U.S. 1…
discussed
Cited "see"
West Michigan Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission
It also made clear that this relatedness rested on the view that our society benefits from exposure to a broad diversity of ideas and perspectives, a view of the public interest that it derived in large part from the Supreme Court’s First Amendment jurisprudence: As the Supreme Court has stated, the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States “rests on the assump; tion that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public.” * * * Id. at 394 n. 4 (quoting Associated Press v. United States, 326 U.S…
discussed
Cited "see"
Central Florida Enterprises, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Cowles Broadcasting, Inc., Intervenor
See Wrather-Alvarez Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC, 101 U.S.App.D.C. 324, 326-27 , 248 F.2d 646, 648-49 (1957) 52 62 F.C.C.2d at 957 53 TV-9, Inc. v. FCC, 161 U.S.App.D.C. 349 , 495 F.2d 929 , Cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974).
cited
Cited "see"
National Citizens Committee for Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission
See generally TV 9, Inc. v. FCC, 161 U.S.App.D.C. 349 , 495 F.2d 929, 938 (1973), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974). .
discussed
Cited "see"
National Citizens Committee for Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Elyria-Lorain Broadcasting Co., Intervenors. Owosso Broadcasting Company, Inc. v. United States of America and Federal Communications Commission, Ksl, Inc., Intervenor. National Association of Broadcasters v. Federal Communications Commission and the United States of America, Ksl, Inc., Intervenor. Wjag, Inc. v. United States of America and Federal Communications Commission, Whas, Inc., Louisiana Television Broadcasting Corp., Intervenors. The Ogden Newspapers, Inc. v. United States of America and Federal Communications Commission, Ksl, Inc., Intervenor (Two Cases). Daily Telegraph Printing Company v. United States of America and Federal Communications Commission, Whas, Inc., Louisiana Television Broadcasting Corporation, Ksl, Inc., Intervenors. American Newspaper Publishers Association v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Ksl, Inc., Intervenor. The Brockway Company v. United States of America and Federal Communications Commission, Ksl, Inc., Intervenor. Gray Communications Systems, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Ksl, Inc., Intervenor
See generally TV 9, Inc. v. FCC, 161 U.S.App.D.C. 349 , 495 F.2d 929, 938 (1973), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974) 106 See text accompanying notes 30-32 supra 107 Justice offers as a separate grounds for reversal the Commission's failure to accord greater weight to antitrust considerations, particularly competition for advertising revenues.
discussed
Cited "see"
Fidelity Television, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Rko General, Inc., Intervenor
(2×)
See generally TV 9, Inc. v. FCC, 161 U.S.App.D.C. 349 , 495 F.2d 929, 938 (1973), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974) 29 See Hale v. FCC, 138 U.S.App.D.C. 125 , 425 F.2d 556 , 562 & n. 2 (1970) (Tamm, J. concurring); Bennett, Media Concentration and the FCC: Focusing with a Section Seven Lens, 66 Nw.U.L.Rev. 159, 181-86 (1971).
discussed
Cited "see"
United Television Co. v. Federal Communications Commission
See TV 9, Inc., 161 U.S.App.D.C. 349 , 495 F.2d 929, 935-38 (1973), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974); Non-Discrimination in Broadcast Employment, 18 F.C.C.2d 240 (1967).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Morsani v. Major League Baseball
Union, 287 F.Supp. 132, 133 (D.Conn.1968) ("order or other paper” refers only to papers filed in proceeding itself, not to unrelated Supreme Court opinion); see also O'Bryan v. Chandler, 496 F.2d 403, 412 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974) (noting Avco was rightly decided); Metropolitan Dade County v. TCI TKR of South Florida, 936 F.Supp. 958, 959 (S.D.Fla.1996) (Federal Communications Commission opinion was not an "order or other paper” making state court action removable). 5 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Stone v. Williams
Where the case stated by the initial complaint would not be removable by the defendant, a subsequent amendment to the complaint which provides a new basis for removal or makes the action a “new suit” may restart the limitations period. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1446 (b); Miller v. Stauffer Chemical Co., 527 F.Supp. 775 (D.C.Kan.1981); see also O’Bryan v. Chandler, 496 F.2d 403 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Tyler v. Bonaparte's Fried Chicken, Inc.
See also O’Bryan v. Chandler, 496 F.2d 403 (10th Cir.1974), cert. denied 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974); Henderson v. Mid-West Refining Company, 43 F.2d 23 (10th Cir.1930); Dow Coming Corporation v. Schpak, 65 F.R.D. 72 (N.D.I11. 1974); and Garden Homes, Inc. v. Mason, 143 F.Supp. 144 (D.Mass.1956).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Committee for Community Access v. Federal Communications Commission, Grandbanke Corporation, Intervenor. Save Our Station Committee v. Federal Communications Commission, Grandbanke Corporation, Intervenor. Simon Geller v. Federal Communications Commission, Grandbanke Corporation, Intervenor
See also TV 9, Inc. v. FCC, 495 F.2d 929 , 938 (D.C.Cir.1973), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974) (noting that in applying comparative factors, "[r]easonable expectation, not advance demonstration, is a basis for merit to be accorded relevant factors"); id. at 938 ("[I]t is upon ownership that public policy places primary reliance with respect to diversification of content, and that historically has proven to be significantly influential with respect to editorial comment and the presentation of news.") (emphasis added); see generally Garrett v. FCC, 513 F.2d 1056…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Committee for Community Access v. Federal Communications Commission
(2×)
See also TV 9, Inc. v. FCC, 495 F.2d 929 , 937 (D.C.Cir.1973), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974); Citizens Communication Center v. FCC, 447 F.2d 1201 , 1213 n. 36 (D.C.Cir.1971).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bilingual Bicultural Coalition on Mass Media, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission
See also TV 9, Inc. v. FCC, 161 U.S.App.D.C. 349, 358 , 495 F.2d 929, 938 (1973), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974) (Commission must give weight to minority ownership and participation in comparative-application proceeding as a portent of increased diversity of program content); Garrett v. FCC, 168 U.S.App.D.C. 266, 273 , 513 F.2d 1056, 1063 (1975) (“[t]he entire thrust of TV 9 is that black ownership and participation together are themselves likely to bring about programming that is responsive to the needs of the black citizenry”). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
The Bilingual Bicultural Coalition on Mass Media, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Mission Central Co., Intervenor. Chinese for Affirmative Action v. Federal Communications Commission, Cbs, Inc., Intervenor
See also TV 9, Inc. v. FCC, 161 U.S.App.D.C. 349, 358 , 495 F.2d 929, 938 (1973), Cert. denied, 419 U.S. 986 , 95 S.Ct. 245 , 42 L.Ed.2d 194 (1974) (Commission must give weight to minority ownership and participation in comparative-application proceeding as a portent of increased diversity of program content); Garrett v. FCC, 168 U.S.App.D.C. 266, 273 , 513 F.2d 1056, 1063 (1975) ("(t)he entire thrust of TV 9 is that black ownership and participation together are themselves likely to bring about programming that is responsive to the needs of the black citizenry") 19 NAACP v. FPC, 172 U.S.App.D…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mid-Florida Television Corp.
v.
TV 9, Inc. and Federal Communications Commission v. TV 9, Inc.
v.
TV 9, Inc. and Federal Communications Commission v. TV 9, Inc.
No. 74-21; No. 74-31.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 29, 1974.
C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.
Mr. Justice Blackmun would grant certiorari.Reported below: 161 U. S. App. D. C. 349, 495 F. 2d 929.