Television Transmission, Inc.

47 Cal. 2d 82 (1956), 301 P.2d 862

The Court reversed a Commission decision that asserted jurisdiction over a cable television system.  The Court concluded that offering service to the public was not enough to subject an entity to regulation as a public utility; the service offered must also be one identified by the Legislature as a public utility service.  This is the other side of the Richfield coin.  In Richfield, (Para. 89, supra) the activity at issue fell within a statutory description but the non-statutory element of dedication was absent.  (In 2007, the Court of Appeal in the Third District held that Television Transmission, Inc. could not be construed to exclude cable television service from the scope of the term “other means of communications.”  Cequel III Communications v. LAFCO, Nevada County (Truckee-Donner PUD, Real Party in Interest), 149 Cal. App. 4th 310, 2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 492 (April 3, 2007).)

Download PDF