BOROUGH OF SAYREVILLE ET AL.

v.

MIDDLESEX COUNTY UTILITIES AUTHORITY ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (26 total)

• Pac. & S. Co., Inc. v. Duncan, 744 F.2d 1490 (11th Cir. 1984)
  …080, 36 L.Ed.2d 772 (1973); Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 395 U.S. 367, 89 S.Ct. 1794, 23 L.Ed.2d 371 (1969); and Muir v. Alabama Educational Television Commission, 656 F. 2d 1012, 1017 (5th Cir.1981), on rehearing, 688 F. 2d 1033, cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1023, 103 S.Ct. 1274, 75 L.Ed.2d 495 (1983), indicate, if only by implication, that broadcast licensees and the press generally have a duty to provide public service. That duty finds at least partial expression in the fair use doctrine. But it is a long…
• Little v. City OF N. Miami, 805 F.2d 962 (11th Cir. 1986)
  …of First Amendment rights. Perry, 408 U.S. at 598, 92 S.Ct. at 2698; Hall, 755 F. 2d at 787; Cate v. Oldham, 707 F. 2d 1176, 1186 (11th Cir.1983); Muir v. Alabama Educational Television Commission, 688 F. 2d 1033, 1037 (5th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1023, 103 S.Ct. 1274 (1983). Viewed in the light most favorable to appellant, appellant’s complaint asserts that the City Council of North Miami, acting under the color of Florida law, adopted and disseminated an official resolution publicly censuring a…
• Cinevision Corp. v. City OF Burbank, 745 F.2d 560 (9th Cir. 1984)
  …aking process in public broadcast [*575] ing, which by definition is based on content, does not alone violate the first amendment. See Muir v. Alabama Educational Television Commission, 688 F. 2d 1033, 1043-47 (5th Cir.1982) (en banc), cert, denied, 460 U.S. 1023, 103 S.Ct. 1274, 75 L.Ed.2d 495 (1983); Canby, The First Amendment and the State as Editor: Implications for Public Broadcasting, 52 Tex.L.Rev. 1123, 1148-65 (1974).18 A court must, however, scrutinize closely a government’s dedication of a forum t…