Supreme Court of the United States
American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Central Office Telephone, Inc.
June 15, 1998524 U.S. 214
Summary
The Court held that the filed‑rate doctrine of the Communications Act pre‑empted the respondent’s state‑law breach‑of‑contract and tortious‑interference claims because they sought privileges not contained in AT&T’s filed tariff, and therefore reversed the Ninth Circuit’s judgment. Justice Stevens dissented, arguing the tort claim was not wholly derivative and should be remanded, while Chief Justice Rehnquist concurred with the majority’s holding.
Holding
- Whether the filed‑rate requirements of §203 of the Communications Act pre‑empt COT’s state‑law breach‑of‑contract claim.. The breach‑of‑contract claim is pre‑empted because it seeks a privilege not contained in the filed tariff.
- Whether the filed‑rate requirements of §203 of the Communications Act pre‑empt COT’s state‑law tortious‑interference claim.. The tortious‑interference claim is pre‑empted because it is wholly derivative of the pre‑empted contract claim.
- Whether the saving clause of the Communications Act, §414, preserves any of COT’s state‑law claims despite the filed‑rate doctrine.. The saving clause does not preserve the claims because they are inconsistent with the statutory filed‑tariff requirements.
Docket 97-679