WilTel Communications Group Inc. provides Internet, data, voice, and video services. The company operates in two segments: Network and Vyvx. Network's products and services fall into eight categories: Packet-based data services, Private line services, Voice services, Optical wave services, Backhaul services, Dark fiber and conduit rights, Collocation services, and Managed Services. Network's customers include regional Bell operating companies, cable television companies, Internet service providers, application service providers, data storage service providers, managed network service providers, digital subscriber line service providers, long distance carriers, local service providers, utilit...
One Technology Center
Tulsa, OK 74103
Founded in 1994
Court-Approves Class Action Settlements on Sprint, Qwest, Level 3, and WilTel Communications
Mar 7 13
Courts have granted preliminary approval for multiple class-action Settlements involving fiber-optic cable and related telecommunications equipment that has been installed in railroad Rights of Way. These Settlements resolve lawsuits in a number of states across the country, and will provide cash benefits to current and former owners of land next to or under the Rights of Way. Sprint, Qwest, Level 3, and WilTel Communications, the defendants, beginning in the mid-1980s, the companies or their predecessors buried fiber-optic cable and installed related telecommunications equipment within railroad Rights of Way nationwide. A railroad Right of Way is a strip of land on which a railroad company builds and operates a railroad. The defendants entered into agreements with the railroads that own and occupy the Rights of Way, and under those agreements paid the railroads for the rights to install the fiber-optic cable and related telecommunications equipment within the Rights of Way. Plaintiffs allege that, before installing the fiber-optic cable and related telecommunications equipment, the defendants also were required to obtain consent from those landowners who owned the land under the Rights of Way. The defendants contend that the railroads had the right to allow them to use the Rights of Way without the need for further permission from the adjoining landowners and deny any wrongdoing.