Talk America, Inc. v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co. | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Supreme Court of the United States |
||||||
Full case name | Talk America, Inc. v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co. DBA AT&T Michigan | |||||
Docket nos. | 10-313 | |||||
Prior history | Michigan Public Service Commission decision reversed sub nom. Mich. Bell Tel. Co. v. Lark, 2007 WL 2868633 (E.D. Mich. 2007); affirmed sub nom. Michigan Bell Telephone Co. v. Covad Communications Co., 597 F.3d 370 (6th Cir. 2010); certiorari granted, 562 U. S. ___ (2010) | |||||
Argument | Oral argument | |||||
Holding | ||||||
The Federal Communications Commission had advanced a reasonable interpretation of its regulations in a dispute with AT&T. | ||||||
Court membership | ||||||
|
||||||
Case opinions | ||||||
Majority | Thomas, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, and Sotomayor | |||||
Concurrence | Scalia | |||||
Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. |
Talk America, Inc. v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co., No. 10-313 (2011), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) had advanced a reasonable interpretation of its regulations in a dispute with AT&T.[1]