Cases 1 - 5 of 5
Central Telephone Co of VA v. Sprint Communications Company
as 12-1322
Plaintiff - Appellee:
CENTRAL TELEPHONE COMPANY OF VIRGINIA, a Virginia Corporation, UNITED TELEPHONE SOUTHEAST, LLC, a Virginia Limited Liability Company, EMBARQ FLORIDA, INC., a Florida Corporation and others
Defendant - Appellant:
SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY OF VIRGINIA, INC., a Virginia Corporation and SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership
Central Telephone Company of Virginia et al v. Sprint Communications Company of Virginia, Inc. et al
as 3:2009cv00720
Plaintiff:
Central Telephone Company of Virginia, United Telephone Southeast, LLC, Embarq Florida, Inc. and others
Defendant:
Sprint Communications Company of Virginia, Inc. and Sprint Communications Company LP
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. ยง 0332 Telecommuncations Act of 1996
Core Communications, Inc. v. FCC
as 08-1365
Petitioner:
Core Communications, Inc.
Respondent:
Federal Communications Commission and United States of America
Intervenor For Petitioner:
EarthLink, Inc., O1 Communications, Inc., Pac-West Telecomm, Inc. and others
Intervenor For Respondent:
AT&T Inc., Carolina Telephone and Telegraph Company LLC, Central Telephone Company and others
Amicus Curiae For Petitioner:
Arizona Corporation Commission
Collins, Inc. v. Embarq Missouri, Inc. et al
as 2:2008cv02526
Plaintiff:
Arthur A. Collins, Inc. and Arthur A. Collins, Inc.
Defendant:
Embarq Missouri, Inc., United Telephone Company of Kansas, United Telephone Company of Southcentral Kansas and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Embarq Missouri, Inc. et al v. MCI Communications Services, Inc.
as 1:2008cv00668
Plaintiff:
Embarq Missouri, Inc., United Telephone Company of Kansas, United Telephone Company of Southcentral Kansas and others
Defendant:
MCI Communications Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
