ADMINISTRATIVE LAW-HEARING ON QUESTIONS OF LAW AS A REQUIREMENT FOR DUE PROCESS

Authors

Abstract

The Federal Communications Commission granted a permit for a radio station to the Coastal Plains Broadcasting Company. WJR, not a party to that proceeding, filed a petition for reconsideration and hearing, alleging, inter alia, that the new station would cause objectionable interference with WJR. Coastal Plains entered an opposition, asserting that the petition, on its face, was legally insufficient to make WJR a party. WJR did not respond. The commission, without oral argument, denied the application, holding that there was no objectionable interference. The court of appeals treated this as equivalent to a holding as a matter of law, essentially as though raised on demurrer, that the -petition did not state facts sufficient to raise any legal issue. It held that due process required an oral argument on every question of law except those involving interlocutory orders and refused to consider the merits, remanding the case for oral argument. Held, reversed. Oral argument is unnecessary. Federal Communications Commission v. WJR, the Goodwill Station, Inc. and Coastal Plains Broadcasting Co., Inc., 337 U.S. 265, 69 S.Ct. 1097 (1949).

Recommended Citation

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW-HEARING ON QUESTIONS OF LAW AS A REQUIREMENT FOR DUE PROCESS, 48 Mich. L. Rev. 1186 (1950).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol48/iss8/11