Michigan Bell Tel. Co. v. Covad Commc'n Co., No. 07-2469 (6th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Justia Opinion Summary
Want to stay in the know about new opinions from the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ?
Sign up for free summaries delivered directly to your inbox. Learn More ›
You already receive new opinion summaries from Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals . Did you know we offer summary newsletters for even more practice areas and jurisdictions? Explore them here.
The court's February 2010 decision was reversed by the United States Supreme Court, the Court, which held that the incumbent local exchange carrier, Michigan Bell, must lease its existing entrance facilities for interconnection at cost-based rates, Talk Am., Inc. v. Mich. Bell Tel. Co., 131 S. Ct. 2254, (2011). In response, the Sixth Circuit reversed the district court and remanded.
This opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on February 23, 2010.
Download PDF
RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 File Name: 12a0082p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ X No. 07-2469 MICHIGAN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, -Nos. 07-2469/2473 v. > COVAD COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY; TALK , AMERICA, INC.; XO COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INC., Intervenors Defendants-Appellants, MCLEODUSA TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INC.; TDS METROCOM, LLC, Intervenors, J. PETER LARK, Commissioner; LAURA CHAPPELLE; MONICA MARTINEZ, Defendants. No. 07-2473 MICHIGAN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LAURA CHAPPELLE; J. PETER LARK; MONICA MARTINEZ, Defendants-Appellants, COVAD COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY; TALK AMERICA, INC.; MCLEODUSA TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INC.; TDS METROCOM, LLC; XO COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INC., Intervenors. N On Remand from the United States Supreme Court. No. 06-11982 Julian A. Cook, Jr., District Judge. Argued: December 10, 2008 Decided and Filed: March 26, 2012 Before: BATCHELDER, Chief Judge; GILMAN and SUTTON, Circuit Judges. 1 Nos. 07-2469/2473 Michigan Bell Telephone Co. v. Lark, et al. Page 2 _________________ COUNSEL ARGUED: Bill Magness, CASEY, GENTZ & MAGNESS, L.L.P., Austin, Texas, Michael A. Nickerson, OFFICE OF THE MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellants. William Julius Champion III, DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC, Ann Arbor, Michigan, for Appellee. Scott H. Angstreich, KELLOGG, HUBER, HANSEN, TODD, EVANS & FIGEL, PLLC, Washington, D.C., for Amici Curiae. ON BRIEF: Bill Magness, CASEY, GENTZ & MAGNESS, L.L.P., Austin, Texas, Michael A. Nickerson, OFFICE OF THE MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL, Lansing, Michigan, Michael S. Ashton, FRASER, TREBILCOCK, DAVIS & DUNLAP, P.C., Lansing, Michigan, Steven D. Hughey, OFFICE OF THE MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellants. William Julius Champion III, Jeffery V. Stuckey, DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC, Ann Arbor, Michigan, for Appellee. Scott H. Angstreich, KELLOGG, HUBER, HANSEN, TODD, EVANS & FIGEL, PLLC, Washington, D.C., Laurel R. Bergold, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Washington, D.C., for Amici Curiae. _________________ OPINION _________________ ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Chief Judge. On appeal of this case to the United States Supreme Court, the Court reversed our prior holding and held that the incumbent local exchange carrier, Michigan Bell, must lease its existing entrance facilities for interconnection at cost-based rates. Talk Am., Inc. v. Mich. Bell Tel. Co., 564 U.S. --, 131 S. Ct. 2254, 2260 (2011). Consequently, we REVERSE the district court s judgment to the contrary and REMAND this case to the district court with instructions to enter an Order consistent with the Supreme Court s opinion.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
