Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Fcc Vs. Nextwave Personal Communications Inc.

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jan 27, 2003

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

50 entries 5 linked 45 unlinked
Show
  1. Morton Vs. Mancari US Supreme Court · Jun 17, 1974
  2. Farrey Vs. Sanderfoot US Supreme Court · May 23, 1991
  3. Grogan Vs. Garner US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1991
  4. Gutierrez Vs. Ada US Supreme Court · Dec 06, 1999
  5. United States Vs. Kirby US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1868
  6. FCC v. NextWave
    Search
  7. Communications Inc. - 537 U.S. 293 (2003) October Term, 2002 Syllabus Federal Communications Commission V. Nextwave
    Search
  8. Together with No. 01-657, Arctic Slope Regional Corp. et al. v. NextWave
    Search
  9. Personal Communications Inc. et al., also on certiorari to the same court. 294 294 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  10. of the Government's objectives in imposing the obligation. E. g., Pennsylvania Dept. of Public Welfare v. Davenport
    Search
  11. d)(2). Ohio v. Kovacs
    Search
  12. and for Senator Patrick Leahy et al. by Walter Dellinger and Jonathan D. Hacker. 296 296 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  13. the FCC, pending confirmation of a reorganization plan. NextWave initiated an adversary proceed- 298 298 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  14. billion-and the District Court affirmed. NextWave Personal Communications, Inc. v. FCC
    Search
  15. F.3d 130 , 133 (2001). We granted certiorari. 535 U. S. 904 (2002). 300 300 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  16. those laws that the agency itself is charged with administering. See, e. g., Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe
    Search
  17. have some further motive behind the cancellation-assuring the financial solvency of the licensed entity, e. g., Perez v. Campbell
    Search
  18. cause of the cancellation-the act or event that triggers the agency's decision to cancel, 302 302 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  19. as the Commission proposes-which means, of course, that such a reading must be rejected. See United States v. Nordic
    Search
  20. Johnson v. Home
    Search
  21. Pennsylvania Dept. of Public Welfare v. Davenport
    Search
  22. U. S. 552, 559 (1990). See also Ohio v. Kovacs
    Search
  23. That court did not seek to modify or discharge the debt, but merely prevented the FCC from 304 304 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  24. J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer
    Search
  25. HiBred International, Inc., 534 U. S. 124 , 143-144 (2001) (quoting Morton v. Mancari
    Search
  26. where the dissent would 306 306 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  27. as a creditor. See, e. g., In re NextWave Personal Communications, Inc., 235 308 308 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  28. upon NextWave's defaulting on an installment payment. 2 App. to Pet. for Cert. 409a. 310 310 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  29. are at least at odds with the statute's basic objectives. Cf. United States v. Kirby
    Search
  30. its product if a buyer does not pay-at least if the seller has taken a security interest in the product. E. g., Farrey v. Sanderfoot
    Search
  31. that is bankruptcy's promise, see Grogan v. Garner
    Search
  32. the statute aims. A phrase is sometimes best known by the statutory company it keeps. See, e. g., Gutierrez v. Ada
    Search
  33. only where done solely for bankruptcy-related reasons, i. e., a person's being a bank- 314 314 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  34. a) as an effort to codify this Court's holding in Perez v. Campbell
    Search
  35. that would conform the statute's language to its purposes. They conceded that the provision's 316 316 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  36. cannot simply be a coincidence but must bear a meaningful relation to the prohibited government action. Cf. Staples v. United
    Search
  37. This interpretation is consistent with several lower court efforts to interpret the statute. See, e. g., Toth v. Michigan
    Search
  38. of the mail as containing an implicit exception permitting a local sheriff to arrest a mail carrier. United States v. Kirby
    Search
  39. forbidden entry into the park. See supra, at 311. 318 318 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  40. ante, at 307, is beside this particular point.) 320 320 FCC v. NEXTWAVE
    Search
  41. fiat-used to rescue an interpretation that rests too heavily upon linguistic deduction and too little upon human purpose. v. Because
    Search
  42. Syllabus Federal Communications Commission V. Nextwave
    Search
  43. Ohio v. Kovacs
    Search
  44. NextWave Personal Communications, Inc. v. FCC
    Search
  45. Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe
    Search
  46. Perez v. Campbell
    Search
  47. See United States v. Nordic
    Search
  48. Cf. United States v. Kirby
    Search
  49. Cf. Staples v. United
    Search
  50. Toth v. Michigan
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial