1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 966 F.Supp.
  5. 966 F.Supp. 1043 (1997)
 

MOUNTAIN SOLUTIONS, INC. v. STATE CORP. COM'N OF STATE OF KANSAS

Civil Action No. 97-2116-GTV.

966 F.Supp. 1043 (1997)

MOUNTAIN SOLUTIONS, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF KANSAS, et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, D. Kansas.

May 23, 1997.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mark P. Johnson, Jan P. Helder, Jr., Lisa C. Creighton, Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal, Kansas City, MO, for Mountain Solutions, Inc., Sprint Spectrum, L.P., Liberty Cellular, Inc., Mercury Cellular of Kansas, Western Wireless Corporation, DCC PCS, Inc., Dobson Cellular of Kansas/Missouri, Inc.

Marc E. Elkins, Morrison & Heckler, L.L.P., Kansas City, MO, Mark P. Johnson, Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal, Kansas City, MO, for Topeka Cellular Telephone, Airtouch Cellular of Kansas, CMT Partners.

Eva Powers, Stephen H. Kukta, Kansas Corporation Commission, Topeka, KS, for State Corporation Commission of State of Kansas, National Exchange Carrier Association, Inc., Commissioner of the State Corporation Commission of the State of Kansas, Timothy E. McKee, Commissioner of the State Corporation Commission of the State of Kansas, Susan M. Seltsam, Commissioner of the State Corporation Commission of the State of Kansas, John Wine.

Michael C. Cavell, William R. Drexel, Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., Topeka, KS, Michael D. Moeller, Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P., Kansas City, MO, for Southwestern Bell Telephone Company.

James M. Caplinger, Mark E. Caplinger, James M. Caplinger, Jr., James M. Caplinger, Chtd., Topeka, KS, for Inventors-Defendants.

Victor A. Davis, Jr., Weary, Davis, Henry, Struebing & Troup, Junction City, KS, for Kansas Cable Telecommunications Association, Inc.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

VAN BEBBER, Chief Judge.

Plaintiffs bring this action seeking an injunction prohibiting defendants from requiring commercial mobile service providers in Kansas to contribute to the Kansas Universal Service Fund. The case comes before the court on plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. 3).1 For the reasons set forth below, plaintiffs' motion is denied.

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases