# Citizens Committee to Save WEFM v. Federal Communications Commission

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · November 15, 1973 · 506 F.2d 246

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7838209

## Case

- **Full name:** CITIZENS COMMITTEE TO SAVE WEFM and Citizens Committee to Save WEFM, Inc. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION and United States of America, GCC Communications of Chicago, Inc. Zenith Radio Corporation, Intervenors
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** November 15, 1973
- **Citations:** 506 F.2d 246; 27 A.L.R. Fed. 324; 165 U.S. App. D.C. 185; 31 Rad. Reg. 2d (P & F) 887; 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 7012
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Fahy
- **Judges:** Bazelon, Fahy, Leven, Leventhal, MacKinnon, Maekinnon, McGowan, Parts, Robb, Robinson, Tamm, Thal, Wilkey, Wright
- **Cited by:** 23 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7838209

## Opinion text

FAHY, Senior Circuit Judge
(dissenting).
The question now is limited to whether the assignment should have been approved without a hearing. A hearing is required to resolve factual disputes which are substantial and material. 47 U.S.C. § 309 (e). There is no doubt that this provision applies when the Commission is to decide whether a format change such as here proposed would go into effect upon Commission approval of the assignment of the broadcasting license, a decision to be made under the standard of the public interest, convenience, and necessity. See, e. g., Lakewood Broadcasting Service v. F.C.C., 156 U.S.App.D.C. 9 , 478 F.2d 919 (1973).
In approving the application for the assignment the Commission relied materially and substantially upon alleged financial losses suffered by Zenith, the assignor. I agree with Commissioner Johnson in his dissenting opinion that the attribution of such losses to Zenith’s classical music format is a question which could not be answered without further investigation. The claim of losses was put in factual dispute by the Committee opposing the assignment, since Zenith continued to use the station to advertise its own manufactured products.
Since the court now affirms, I do not attempt an analysis of the further contention of the Committee that a hearing was required under the reasoning of this court’s decision in the Atlanta case of Citizens Committee v. F.C.C., 141 U.S.App.D.C. 109 , 436 F.2d 263 (1970), where the proposed abandonment of a classical music format was also involved. I add, however, that the limitation upon issues which require a hearing contained in the Keep Progressive Rock case 1 does not seem to me to accord with the approach of our court in the Atlanta case.
. The Citizens Committee to Keep Progressive Rock v. F. C. C., 156 U.S.App.D.C. 16 , 478 F.2d 926 (1973).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7838209. Public record. Not legal advice.