National Cable & Telecommunications Assn., Inc. v. Gulf Power Co.’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
67 federal appellate · 12 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 158 later decisions (11 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. v. Brand X Internet Services (2005), Corley v. United States (2009)
67 federal appellate · 12 district · 8 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2112 · 28 U.S.C. § 2342 · 47 U.S.C. § 153 · 47 U.S.C. § 157 · 47 U.S.C. § 224 · 47 U.S.C. § 230 (Communications Decency Act § 230) · 47 U.S.C. § 402 · 47 U.S.C. § 522
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Permian Basin Area Rate Cases · National Cable & Telecommunications Ass'n v. Gulf Power Co. · AT&T Corp. v. City of Portland
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 158 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(defined as attachments by a cable television system or provider of telecommunications service) extended to attachments that provided both cable television and high-speed Internet access (attachments for so-called”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“regulate the rates, terms, and conditions for pole attachments,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a utility providing electric service may deny a cable television system or any telecommunications carrier access to its poles, ducts, conduits, or rights-of-way on a non-discriminatory basis where there is insufficient capacity and for reasons of safety, reliability and generally applicable engineering purposes.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.