Winnebago Television Corporation, Petitioner, v. United States of America, and Federal Communications Commission, Respondents.radio Wisconsin, Inc., and Greater Rockford Television, Inc., Intervenors, 258 F.2d 163 (D.C. Cir. 1958)
Annotate this CaseDecided July 2, 1958
Mr. Vernon L. Wilkinson, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. James A. McKenna, Jr., Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for petitioner.
Mr. Richard A. Solomon, Asst. Gen. Counsel, F. C. C., with whom Messrs. Warren E. Baker, Gen. Counsel, F. C. C., John J. O'Malley, Jr., Counsel, F. C. C., and Daniel M. Friedman, Atty., Dept. of Justice, were on the brief for respondents.
Mr. Arthur W. Scharfeld, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Arthur Stambler, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for intervenor Radio Wisconsin, Inc.
Mr. Stanley S. Neustadt, Washington, D. C., for intervenor Greater Rockford Television, Inc. Messrs. Marcus Cohn and Paul Dobin, Washington, D. C., were on the brief for intervenor, Greater Rockford Television, Inc.
Before WILBUR K. MILLER, WASHINGTON and BURGER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner Winnebago, operator of a UHF station at Rockford, Illinois, seeks review of an order of the Federal Communications Commission denying, after a rule-making proceeding, proposals to amend channel assignments in Madison, Wisconsin, and Rockford. After consideration of the record in light of petitioner's contentions, we find no basis for disturbing the Commission's action. Cf. Coastal Bend Telev. Co. v. F. C. C., 1956, 98 U.S.App.D.C. 251, 234 F.2d 686; W. I. R. L. Television Co. v. U. S. (WIRL Television Co. v. F. C. C.) 1958, 102 U.S.App.D.C. 341, 253 F.2d 863; Springfield Television Broadcasting Corp. v. F. C. C., 104 U.S.App.D.C. ___, 259 F.2d 170.
Affirmed.
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.
