Cable Communication Board State Minnesota Cable Communication Board State Minnesota

Cable Communication Board State Minnesota

MN.1053 , 356 N.W.2d 658 (1984)

    • $0.99
    • $0.99

Publisher Description

1. An objector to confirmation of a cable franchise is not entitled to a hearing as a matter of right under the Cable Communications Act, due process principles, or Cable Communications Board regulations. 2. The Cable Communications Board's use of a three-part test to determine if a matter was substantially contested within the meaning of its rule was a permissible interpretation of its existing rule and was not the improper promulgation of a new rule.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1984
October 26
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
23
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SELLER
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
SIZE
76.2
KB

More Books by En Banc Supreme Court of Minnesota

James D. Armstrong v. Potlatch Corporation James D. Armstrong v. Potlatch Corporation
1988
State Minnesota v. Matthew Charles Gore State Minnesota v. Matthew Charles Gore
1990
A. C. Lestico v. Albert H. Kuehner. A. C. Lestico v. Albert H. Kuehner.
1938
State Ex Rel. Alma Larson v. Probate Court State Ex Rel. Alma Larson v. Probate Court
1938
Lester Grames and Joyce Grames V. Lester Grames and Joyce Grames V.
1990
State Ex Rel. Louis Haak v. Board State Ex Rel. Louis Haak v. Board
1985