AT&T Corp. v. City of Portland
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
216 F.3d 871 (2000)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
AT&T Corp. (plaintiff) had an exclusive contract with Excite, an internet-service provider (ISP), to provide internet service bundled as part of AT&T’s @Home product. AT&T completed a merger with Telecommunications, Inc. (TCI). As part of the merger, each local franchising authority (LFA) with which TCI had a cable-franchise agreement had to approve a transfer of that franchise to AT&T. The City of Portland (defendant) was one such LFA. The city conditioned approval of the transfer of TCI’s franchise to AT&T on AT&T granting other ISPs paid access to its cable-modem platform. AT&T refused the condition, and the city denied the franchise transfer. AT&T sued the city in federal court, contending that the open-access mandate violated the Communications Act of 1934 (the act) because the act prohibited an LFA from regulating non-cable services through its cable-franchise agreement. The district court granted the city summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Thomas, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.