Farrell McKean D/b as Bus. & Prof'l Tel. Exchanges v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, Mobilfone, Inc., Intervenor, 295 F.2d 135 (D.C. Cir. 1961). · Go Syfert
Search
Farrell McKean D/b as Bus. & Prof'l Tel. Exchanges v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, Mobilfone, Inc., Intervenor, 295 F.2d 135 (D.C. Cir. 1961). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
1 citation event across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: United States v. Austin (nmd, 1985-08-19)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Austin
D.N.M. · 1985 · confidence medium
Fiano v. United States, 295 F.2d 135, 136 (9th Cir.1958) (per curiam). 45 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Farrell McKEAN, D/B as Business and Professional Telephone Exchanges, Appellant
v.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Appellee, Mobilfone, Inc., Intervenor
15969_1.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Apr 27, 1961.
295 F.2d 135
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.
Miller, Prettyman, Burger.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
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.