California Association of the Physically Handicapped, Inc. v. FCC
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
778 F.2d 823 (1985)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
Metromedia, Inc., planned to transfer a majority of its stock from public ownership to John W. Kluge, Metromedia’s president and chief executive officer. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) (defendant) had to approve all such transfers. If a transfer involved a substantial change in ownership or control, the FCC required a long-form application and would only approve the transfer if it served the public interest. The FCC allowed Metromedia to apply for the transfer through a short-form application after determining that Metromedia’s proposed transfer would not involve a substantial change in ownership or control because Kluge already controlled Metromedia. The California Association of the Physically Handicapped, Inc. (the Association) (plaintiff) filed a petition with the FCC opposing the transfer and requesting the FCC require Metromedia to submit a long-form application. The Association claimed that Metromedia had failed to make television accessible to the hearing impaired and had failed to make reasonable attempts to hire employees with handicaps. The FCC rejected the Association’s petition, and the Association appealed. Metromedia moved to dismiss the case, arguing that the Association lacked standing.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ginsburg, J.)
Dissent (Wald, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.