Legal Opinion · Dissent

Meadville Master Antenna, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided April 12, 1976No. 75-1889Published

1DissentGibbons, Circuit Judge

I agree, not without misgivings, that there is a sufficient evidentiary basis in the administrative record to support the conclusion by the Federal Communications Commission that WICU-TV, Channel 12, Erie, Pennsylvania, projects a Grade B contour over Meadville. Thus I agree that under 47 C.F.R. § 76.92 (1975), WICU is entitled to signal priority over WFMJ-TV, Channel 21, Youngstown, Ohio, on the Meadville Master Antenna, Inc. (MMA) cable system. I do not agree, however, that the Commission’s action on MMA’s waiver petition can be approved.

When WICU requested signal priority, MMA petitioned…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. National Broadcasting Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  2. Titusville Cable TV, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1968
  3. Meadville Master Antenna, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of Ameria, Lamb Communications, Inc., IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API