American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Central Office Telephone, Inc., 524 U.S. 214, 22 (1998)

Page:   Index   Previous  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22

Cite as: 524 U. S. 214 (1998)

Stevens, J., dissenting

simply rely on AT&T's bald assertion, supported only by a statement of the Magistrate taken out of context, that the tort claim is "wholly derivative"; we have an obligation either to study the record or at least to remand and allow the lower courts to consider the proper application of the legal rule to the facts of this case.

I respectfully dissent.

235

Page:   Index   Previous  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22

Last modified: October 4, 2007