47 U.S.C. § 415

Limitations of actions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 47 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Recovery of charges by carrier

All actions at law by carriers for recovery of their lawful charges, or any part thereof, shall be begun within two years from the time the cause of action accrues, and not after.

(b) Recovery of damages

All complaints against carriers for the recovery of damages not based on overcharges shall be filed with the Commission within two years from the time the cause of action accrues, and not after, subject to subsection (d) of this section.

For recovery of overcharges action at law shall be begun or complaint filed with the Commission against carriers within two years from the time the cause of action accrues, and not after, subject to subsection (d) of this section, except that if claim for the overcharge has been presented in writing to the carrier within the two-year period of limitation said period shall be extended to include two years from the time notice in writing is given by the carrier to the claimant of disallowance of the claim, or any part or parts thereof, specified in the notice.

(d) Extension

If on or before expiration of the period of limitation in subsection (b) or (c) a carrier begins action under subsection (a) for recovery of lawful charges in respect of the same service, or, without beginning action, collects charges in respect of that service, said period of limitation shall be extended to include ninety days from the time such action is begun or such charges are collected by the carrier.

(e) Accrual of cause of action for transmission of message

The cause of action in respect of the transmission of a message shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to accrue upon delivery or tender of delivery thereof by the carrier, and not after.

(f) Enforcement petition

A petition for the enforcement of an order of the Commission for the payment of money shall be filed in the district court or the State court within one year from the date of the order, and not after.

(g) “Overcharges” defined

The term “overcharges” as used in this section shall be deemed to mean charges for services in excess of those applicable thereto under the schedules of charges lawfully on file with the Commission.

(June 19, 1934, ch. 652, title IV, § 415, 48 Stat. 1099; Pub. L. 93–507, Nov. 30, 1974, 88 Stat. 1577.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1974—Subsecs. (a) to (c). Pub. L. 93–507 amended subsecs. (a) to (c) generally, substituting reference to two years for reference to one year wherever appearing.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 84 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1952–2023 · leading case: NetworkIP, LLC v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 548 F.3d 116 (D.C. Cir. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

NetworkIP, LLC v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 548 F.3d 116 (D.C. Cir. 2008). · cites it 2× “" 47 U.S.C. § 415 (b). The FCC recognizes both formal and informal complaints.”

MCI Telecomm. Corp. v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 512 U.S. 218 (1994). · cites it 2× “The Court suggests that the Commission’s detarifñng policy disrupts the statutory scheme because 47 U. S. C. § 415 (g) defines recoverable ‘“overcharges’” by reference to filed tariffs.”

Prostar v. Massachi, 239 F.3d 669 (5th Cir. 2001). · cites it 3× “Neither party suggests that the two-year limitations period articulated in 47 U.S.C. § 415 applies. This limitations period is restricted to suits involving common carriers.”

Castro v. Collecto, Inc., 634 F.3d 779 (5th Cir. 2011). · cites it 3× “004(a)(3) of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code, 1 rather than the federal statute of limitations period of two years under 47 U.S.C. § 415 (a) of the Federal Communications Act (“the FCA”), 47 U.”

CoreTel Virginia, LLC v. Verizon Virginia, LLC, 808 F.3d 978 (4th Cir. 2015). · cites it 5× “at Verizon Virginia’s (lower) TELRIC rate; (4) including in its damages calculation charges for transport between Verizon’s “serving wire centers” and its IPs; (5) imposing 100% of the TELRIC rate for certain facilities for which Verizon had previously billed CoreTel only a…”

Sharon Margaret Pavlak, Cross-Appellee v. John R. Church, Individually & in His Capacity as Chief of Police for the City of Boise, Cross-Appellants, 727 F.2d 1425 (9th Cir. 1984). · cites it 6× “KENNEDY, Circuit Judge: The question now before us is whether the two year statute of limitations provided in § 415(b) of the Federal Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 415 (b), applies to claims against a telephone company arising out of providing equipment to a police department…”

Sprint Commc'ns Co., L.P. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & the United States of Am., at & T Corp., Intervenor, 76 F.3d 1221 (D.C. Cir. 1996). · cites it 3× “The Common Carrier Bureau dismissed Sprint’s claim insofar as it related to damages suffered outside the two-year limitations period of 47 U.S.C. § 415 — that is, damages suffered before January 1985.”

MFS Int'l, Inc. v. Int'l Telcom Ltd., 50 F. Supp. 2d 517 (E.D. Va. 1999). · cites it 5× “” 47 U.S.C. § 415 (b). 6 This provi *520 sion, Telcom contends, reflects a public policy allowing a two-year window in which to bring claims against carriers and rendering parties powerless to avoid or contradict this federal policy by contract.”

Firstcom, Inc. v. Qwest Commc'ns, 618 F. Supp. 2d 1001 (D. Minnesota 2007). · cites it 5× “Because these state claims fall within the TCA’s broad definition of claims against carriers — that is, because they are actions at law related to the recovery of overcharges as defined by 47 U.”

Csc Holdings, Inc. v. Frank P. Redisi, Sr., & Frank P. Redisi, Jr., 309 F.3d 988 (7th Cir. 2002). “II The parties agree that the relevant statute of limitations is found at 47 U.S.C. § 415 (a), which provides, “All actions at law by carriers for recovery of their lawful charges, or any part thereof, shall be begun, within two years from the time the cause of action accrues,…”

US West, Inc. v. Bus. Disc. Plan, Inc., 196 F.R.D. 576 (D. Colo. 2000). · cites it 4× “Defendants claim that Plaintiff Chasar’s Communications Act claim must be dismissed pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 415 (b). I agree. 47 U.S.C. § 415 (b) states in relevant part: “All complaints against carriers for the recovery of damages not based on overcharges shall be filed with…”

Sherman Gottlieb v. Carnival Corp., No. 05-2733 Cv, 436 F.3d 335 (2d Cir. 2006). “§ 407 (authorizing suit in federal court or state court of general jurisdiction for common carrier's failure to comply with order of payment); 47 U.S.C. § 415 (f) (establishing one-year statute of limitation on suits brought in federal or state courts to enforce Commission order…”

Show all 84 citing cases →

— 47 U.S.C. § 415(g) — 1 case

MCI Telecomm. Corp. v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 512 U.S. 218 (1994). “The Court suggests that the Commission’s detarifñng policy disrupts the statutory scheme because 47 U. S. C. § 415 (g) defines recoverable ‘“overcharges’” by reference to filed tariffs.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.