Case Name: ALLENTOWN BROADCASTING CORPORATION, Appellant, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Appellee, WKAP, Inc., Intervenor
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1955-12-16
Citations: 232 F.2d 57
Docket Number: No. 11957
Parties: ALLENTOWN BROADCASTING CORPORATION, Appellant, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Appellee, WKAP, Inc., Intervenor.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 232
Pages: 57–59

Head Matter:
ALLENTOWN BROADCASTING CORPORATION, Appellant, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Appellee, WKAP, Inc., Intervenor.
No. 11957.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued Nov. 10, 1955.
Decided Dec. 16, 1955.
Petition for Rehearing In Banc Denied Jan. 23, 1956.
Writ of Certiorari Denied April 9, 1956.
See 76 S.Ct. 659.
Mr. Donald C. Beelar, Washington, D. C., with whom Messrs. Charles R. Cutler and Herbert J. Miller, Jr., Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellant. Mr. Reed T. Rollo, Washington, D. C., entered an appearance for appellant.
Mr. Richard A. Solomon, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, with whom Miss Mary Jane Morris, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, was on the brief, for appellee. Mr. J. Roger Wollenberg, Asst. Cen. Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, at time brief was filed, was also on the brief for appellee. Messrs. Warren E. Baker, Gen. Counsel, J. Smith Henley, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Daniel R. Ohlbaum, Counsel, also entered appearances for appellee.
Mr. Stephen Tuhy, Jr., Washington, D. C., for intervenor, WKAP, Inc.
Before PEETTYMAN, WILBUR K. MILLER, and BAZELON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This case has been here twice. Between appeals the Commission entered upon a second hearing, made long findings, and rendered an extensive opinion. The ruling of this court upon the second appeal was reversed by the Supreme Court and the case remanded here for proceedings not inconsistent with that Court's opinion. We have reviewed the matter and heard oral argument. We find no substantial error on the part of the Commission in the features of the case remaining open to our consideration.
Affirmed.
. Easton Pub. Co. v. Federal Communications Comm., 85 U.S.App.D.C. 33, 175 F.2d 344 (D.C.Cir.1949); Allentown Broadcasting Corp. v. Federal Communications Comm., 94 U.S.App.D.C. 353, 222 F.2d 781 (D.C.Cir.1954).
. Federal Communications Comm. v. Allentown Broadcasting Corp., 349 U.S. 358, 75 S.Ct. 855, (1955).