Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
800 Services, Inc. v. AT&T
Date: 02-12-2002
Case Number: 00-3519
Judge: Roth
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Plaintiff's Attorney: Unknown
Defendant's Attorney: Unknown
Description:
Plaintiff 800 Services Inc. appeals from the August 3, 2000 Final Order and the
subsequent September 18, 2000 interest calculation Order of the United States District
Court for the District of New Jersey.
800 Services was an "aggregator" of telecommunications services provided by
AT&T. Aggregators pool telecommunications service in order to provide discounted
service to their customers. AT&T is a provider of interstate long-distance
telecommunications service. The relationship between aggregators and providers is
contractual in nature, but the relationship is conducted within the confines of federal law,
particularly Title 11 of the Communications Act of 1934; as amended. See U.S.C. 201,
et seq. (West 2000). A contract between the parties required 800 Services to compensate
AT&T for any shortfall between the anticipated volume of usage and the actual volume of
services provided by AT&T.
Plaintiff's complaint advanced twelve counts. The Counts included allegations
of unjust enrichment, slander and libel under New Jersey state law, intentional
interference with prospective economic advantage and similar interference with
contractual relations, unfair competition/trade libel and various claims under 201, 202
and 203 of the Communications Act. AT&T counterclaimed for unpaid telephone usage
charges, shortfall charges resulting from contractual obligations and prejudgment interest.
The Final Order granted AT&T's motion for summary judgment and awarded judgment
on the counterclaim.
subsequent September 18, 2000 interest calculation Order of the United States District
Court for the District of New Jersey.
800 Services was an "aggregator" of telecommunications services provided by
AT&T. Aggregators pool telecommunications service in order to provide discounted
service to their customers. AT&T is a provider of interstate long-distance
telecommunications service. The relationship between aggregators and providers is
contractual in nature, but the relationship is conducted within the confines of federal law,
particularly Title 11 of the Communications Act of 1934; as amended. See U.S.C. 201,
et seq. (West 2000). A contract between the parties required 800 Services to compensate
AT&T for any shortfall between the anticipated volume of usage and the actual volume of
services provided by AT&T.
Plaintiff's complaint advanced twelve counts. The Counts included allegations
of unjust enrichment, slander and libel under New Jersey state law, intentional
interference with prospective economic advantage and similar interference with
contractual relations, unfair competition/trade libel and various claims under 201, 202
and 203 of the Communications Act. AT&T counterclaimed for unpaid telephone usage
charges, shortfall charges resulting from contractual obligations and prejudgment interest.
The Final Order granted AT&T's motion for summary judgment and awarded judgment
on the counterclaim.
* * *
Click the case caption above for the full text
of the Court's opinion.
Outcome:
Affirmed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Unknown
Defendant's Experts:
Unknown
Comments:
E-mail suggested comments and/or corrections to:
Kent Morlan
Kent Morlan
About This Case
What was the outcome of 800 Services, Inc. v. AT&T?
The outcome was: Affirmed
Which court heard 800 Services, Inc. v. AT&T?
This case was heard in United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, NJ. The presiding judge was Roth.
Who were the attorneys in 800 Services, Inc. v. AT&T?
Plaintiff's attorney: Unknown. Defendant's attorney: Unknown.
When was 800 Services, Inc. v. AT&T decided?
This case was decided on February 12, 2002.