Icom Holding, Inc. v. MCI Worldcom, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that success on the plaintiff’s “claims would result in discriminatory ‘privileges’” that included “compensatory damages to which other customers subject to MCI’s filed tariff would not be entitled”
• holding that filed-rate doctrine barred state-law breach of contract claims
• holding that filed-rate doctrine barred state-law breach of contract claims
• holding the filed-rate doctrine barred state-law claims pertaining to the price, service, provisioning, and billing of telecommunications services
• “[T]he filed-rate doctrine bars state-law claims not only that pertain directly to the price of telecommunications services subject to an FCC filing, but also state-law claims that concern various nonprice aspects, such as ‘service, provisioning, and billing options.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).