Freedom Ring Communications, LLC v. AT & T CORP.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that claim that defendant has been unjustly enriched because it failed to pay plaintiff for services rendered under its filed tariffs is barred under the filed rate doctrine

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Sancom, Inc. v. Qwest Communications Corp.
  D. South Dakota· 2009-06-19· cited 10×
• All Am. Tel. Co. v. AT & T Corp.
  S.D. Illinois· 2018-09-10· cited 7×
• Qwest Communications Co. v. Aventure Communications Technology, LLC
  S.D. Iowa· 2015-02-17· cited 3×
• Aventure Communications Technology, LLC v. Sprint Communications Co.
  S.D. Iowa· 2015-03-19· cited 3×
• AT&T Corp. v. Aventure Communication Technology, LLC
  S.D. Iowa· 2016-09-19· cited 2×
• Freedom Ring v. AT&T Corp.
  D. New Hampshire· 2002-10-18

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Langadinos v. American Airlines, Inc.
  First Circuit· 2000-01-06· cited 419×
• American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Central Office Telephone, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 1998-06-15· cited 376×
• Martin v. Applied Cellular Technology, Inc.
  First Circuit· 2002-03-19· cited 131×
• Suzanne Cahnmann, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Sprint Corporation
  Seventh Circuit· 1998-01-07· cited 104×
• Advamtel, LLC v. at & T Corp.
  E.D. Virginia· 2000-10-27· cited 17×
• A.S.I. Worldwide Communications Corp. v. WorldCom, Inc.
  D. New Hampshire· 2000-07-21· cited 7×