ACS of Fairbanks, Inc. v. GCI Communication Corp.

Good Law
321 F.3d 1215·2003 WL 1062026
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 12, 2003Nos. 01-35344, 01-35475California412 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

ORDER

Plaintiffs-Appellees ACS of Fairbanks, Inc., ACS of Alaska, Inc., and ACS of Northland, Inc., collectively referred to as “ACS,” seek declaratory and injunctive relief against the enforcement of interconnection contracts arbitrated and approved by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (“RCA”) at the request of GCI Communication Corporation d/b/a/ General Communication, Inc., d/b/a GCI (“GCI”) under the Tele-communications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 251 et seq.

At oral argument, counsel for RCA offered to allow the individual commissioners to be reinstated as parties to this action in substitution for RCA. Counsel acknowledged that the doctrine of Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 , 28 S.Ct. 441 , 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908), permits suit against the commissioners in their official capacities. We hold that the federal courts have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 to entertain such a suit against the commissioners. See Verizon Md., Inc. v. Public Serv. Comm’n of Md., et al., 535 U.S. 635 , 122 S.Ct. 1753, 1758 , 152 L.Ed.2d 871 (2002).

We do not need to decide the Eleventh Amendment immunity issue as against RCA “because ... even absent waiver, [ACS] may proceed against the individual…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.