Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Court Rejects Wireless Carriers' Appeal
Court Watch | 2008/01/22 05:43
In a loss for wireless communications providers, the Supreme Court on Tuesday let stand a lower court ruling preventing the industry from listing taxes and other government fees as separate line items on consumers' bills.

Sprint Nextel Corp. and T-Mobile USA Inc., which is owned by Deutsche Telecom, asked the justices to overturn the ruling. They said in court papers that state and local governments try to "hide" taxes and fees by barring carriers from listing them as separate items, requiring the companies instead to fold them in with the rest of their charges.

Consumer advocates, who support the lower court's ruling, responded that wireless companies frequently add a confusing array of charges that are not always the result of government taxes. Such complaints led the Federal Communications Commission to extend "truth in billing" rules to cell phones in 2005.

The legal question in dispute is whether the FCC was correct when it ruled in 2005 that federal law prohibits the states from barring separate line items. Federal communications law bars state regulation of rates but allows states to regulate "other terms and conditions" of service.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the FCC in 2006, ruling that line items on bills were "other terms and conditions" that states could prohibit. The justices' decision Tuesday allows that ruling to stand.

The issue is not completely settled, however. The Justice Department's Solicitor General, the Bush administration's lawyer, urged the court to turn down the case, even though the Solicitor General disagreed with the appeals court's ruling.

That's because the appeals court sent the case back to the FCC, and the agency is considering additional grounds for preempting state regulation of the wireless industry, the Solicitor General said. As a result, the issue is not yet ripe for Supreme Court review, the Solictor General said.



[PREV] [1] ..[5416][5417][5418][5419][5420][5421][5422][5423][5424].. [8242] [NEXT]
All
Class Action
Bankruptcy
Biotech
Breaking Legal News
Business
Corporate Governance
Court Watch
Criminal Law
Health Care
Human Rights
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Law Center
Law Promo News
Legal Business
Legal Marketing
Litigation
Medical Malpractice
Mergers & Acquisitions
Political and Legal
Politics
Practice Focuses
Securities
Elite Lawyers
Tax
Featured Law Firms
Tort Reform
Venture Business News
World Business News
Law Firm News
Attorneys in the News
Events and Seminars
Environmental
Legal Careers News
Patent Law
Consumer Rights
International
Legal Spotlight
Current Cases
State Class Actions
Federal Class Actions
TikTok content creators sue ..
Abortion consumes US politic..
Trump faces prospect of addi..
Retrial of Harvey Weinstein ..
Starbucks appears likely to ..
Supreme Court will weigh ban..
Judge in Trump case orders m..
Court makes it easier to sue..
Top Europe rights court cond..
Elon Musk will be investigat..
Retired Supreme Court Justic..
The Man Charged in an Illino..
Texas’ migrant arrest law w..
Former Georgia insurance com..
Alabama woman who faked kidn..


Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet.
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Legal Document Services in Los Angeles, CA
Best Legal Document Preparation
www.tllsg.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
East Greenwich Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
  Law Firm Directory
 
 
 
© ClassActionTimes.com. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Class Action Times as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Affordable Law Firm Web Design