Stop the noise

"airads" wrote in message
om...
Now they want the FAA to require A/C registration numbers to be
enlarged and located under the wings "where they belong".

On this side of the pond, you have to have your registration on the
underside of your left wing anyway.

D.

"David Cartwright" wrote in message
...
"airads" wrote in message
om...
Now they want the FAA to require A/C registration numbers to be
enlarged and located under the wings "where they belong".

On this side of the pond, you have to have your registration on the
underside of your left wing anyway.

Which country is that?

Paul

On 20 Mar 2004 08:08:57 -0800, (airads) wrote:

Feb. 24 - The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association on Tuesday
provided initial support to four Massachusetts pilots - all AOPA
members - facing a lawsuit filed by a few residents. The suit alleges
that the noise signature from the aerobatics performed by the pilots
caused significant harm; they are seeking approximately $1 million in
damages. The pilots are based at various airports, some 20 miles from
the homes of the litigants.

"This is potentially an issue that could affect all pilots engaged in
any type of air commerce - from a Cub to a 747," said AOPA President
Phil Boyer. "We are fully prepared to take this through the federal
system if necessary.

I wonder if they've considered getting a "junk yard lawyer" and
counter suit for harrasment.

If the AOPA is serious they really need to come up with a good
countersuit that would cost those filing the original lawsuit far more
than what they are aksing. That they have caused great financial harm
(pilots having to sell planes to meet expenses) is already an arguing
point.

I think in these cases we should not just fight the case but take
agressive counter action "if possible" that would make those
considering similar actions in the future to back up and consider the
consequences.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com



http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...04-1-108x.html

Frank

Roger Halstead wrote:

If the AOPA is serious they really need to come up with a good
countersuit that would cost those filing the original lawsuit far more
than what they are aksing.

The problem there is that they have formed an organization, and it is the org
that is sueing these pilots. You don't have grounds for a countersuit unless this
one is settled in favor of the pilots. After that occurs, they'll disolve the
organization, and you won't have anyone to sue. Furthermore, AOPA has not been
injured by this suit, so they will not be able to file a countersuit (though
they could certainly support the pilots financially if they decide to do so).

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 15:27:02 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote in Message-Id:
:

The problem there is that they have formed an organization, and it is the org
that is sueing these pilots.

It sounds like a jurisdictional issue to me. I doubt the local court
has the right to countermand the FAA's decisions.

Larry Dighera wrote:

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 15:27:02 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote in Message-Id:
:

The problem there is that they have formed an organization, and it is the org
that is sueing these pilots.

It sounds like a jurisdictional issue to me. I doubt the local court
has the right to countermand the FAA's decisions.

You don't understand. This is Massachusetts. Courts in this very Liberal state
can do whatever they want, and they aren't accountable to anybody or anything.

Yes, eventually a federal district court or appellate court might hear the case.
But that will be way down the line, after much direct and collateral economic
damage is done. And that's what the plaintiffs want.

On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 00:49:26 -0500, Jessie Carlson
wrote:

Larry Dighera wrote:

It sounds like a jurisdictional issue to me. I doubt the local court
has the right to countermand the FAA's decisions.

You don't understand. This is Massachusetts. Courts in this very Liberal state
can do whatever they want, and they aren't accountable to anybody or anything.

If that is the line the defense attorney is spewing, it's time to find
another more competent one.

Yes, eventually a federal district court or appellate court might hear the case.
But that will be way down the line, after much direct and collateral economic
damage is done. And that's what the plaintiffs want.

If a suit is filed in a court that lacks jurisdiction solely to harass
the plaintiffs, it could be viewed as abuse of process. The law cuts
both ways.

Furthermore, AOPA has not been
injured by this suit, so they will not be able to file a countersuit (though
they could certainly support the pilots financially if they decide to do so).

According to AOPA Pilot, they have indeed made "a substantial
contribution" to defense costs.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Cub Driver wrote:


Furthermore, AOPA has not been
injured by this suit, so they will not be able to file a countersuit
(though they could certainly support the pilots financially if they decide
to do so).

According to AOPA Pilot, they have indeed made "a substantial
contribution" to defense costs.

Yet the pilots still had to sell their aircraft?

- Andrew

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 16:19:03 -0500, Andrew Gideon
wrote:

Cub Driver wrote:


Furthermore, AOPA has not been
injured by this suit, so they will not be able to file a countersuit
(though they could certainly support the pilots financially if they decide
to do so).

According to AOPA Pilot, they have indeed made "a substantial
contribution" to defense costs.

Yet the pilots still had to sell their aircraft?

They don't have the benefit of their lawyers doing everything for
free.