Summary
describing a loan agreement's "terms of repayment" as "essential" to the contract
Summary of this case from Sundby v. Marquee Funding Grp.Opinion
Editorial Note:
This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)
Issued April 15, 1988. Argued and Submitted March 10, 1988. Submission Vacated Oct. 7, 1988.
Resubmitted June 19, 1990.
55 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 224
Appeal from FCC Report, Order and Final Regulation.
F.C.C.
DENIED.
Before PREGERSON, WIGGINS, and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Circuit Rule 36-3.
California Association of the Physically Handicapped (CAPH) petitions for review of a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Final Report and Order issued April 15, 1987, adopting rules to implement a 1978 amendment to section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of handicap under any program or activity conducted by any Executive agency. CAPH claims that the FCC rule violates the Communications and Rehabilitation Acts by failing to require all licensees to close caption prime time programs. CAPH also claims that the FCC rule violates the Rehabilitation Act, the Communications Act, and the equal protection clause of the fifth amendment by not implementing an equal employment opportunity program for the handicapped.
I. Closed Captioning
CAPH first alleges that the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794, and the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 309(a) compel the FCC to require licensees to close caption all prime-time programming. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia's recent opinion, California Ass'n of the Physically Handicapped, Inc. v. Federal Communications Comm'n, 840 F.2d 88, 91-95 (D.C.Cir.1988) (CAPH IV ), is res judicata as to this issue. See Community Television v. Gottfried, 459 U.S. 498, 508-12 (1983). See also, California Ass'n of the Physically Handicapped, Inc. v. Federal Communications Comm'n, 721 F.2d 667, 669-70 (9th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 832 (1984) (CAPH I ).
II. Equal Employment Opportunity Programs for the Handicapped
CAPH next alleges that the Rehabilitation Act, the Communications Act, and the equal protection clause of the fifth amendment compel the FCC to require licensees to implement equal employment opportunity programs for the handicapped. The district of Columbia's opinion noted above is res judicata as to this issue as well. CAPH IV, 840 F.2d at 95-96. See also CAPH I, 721 F.2d at 669-70.
Petitioner's Petition for Review is hereby DENIED.