Court : US Supreme Court
..... the bill." these statements do not avail appellants. prior to the 1972 act, 611(a) provided that the administrator "shall prescribe and amend such rules and regulations as he may find necessary to provide for the control and abatement of aircraft noise and sonic boom." 82 stat. 395. under 611(b)(3), the ..... be published in the federal register. congress did not leave faa to act at large, but provided in 611(d), as amended, particularized standards: "in prescribing and amending standards and regulations under this section, the faa shall -- " "(1) consider relevant available data relating to aircraft noise and sonic boom, including the results of research, development, ..... and interested persons," shall conduct a study of various facets of the aircraft noise problems and report to the congress within nine months, [ footnote 4 ] i.e., by july, 1973. the 1972 act, by amending 611 of the federal page 411 u. s. 629 aviation act, [ footnote 5 ] also involves the environmental protection agency (epa) .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... the indictment in this case. that the relation between the language of the "aircraft piracy" amendment and the above definition was not overlooked by the drafters is indicated by the different phraseology used in a contemporaneous amendment concerning concealed weapons. section 902(l) of the amended act, 75 stat. 466, 49 u.s.c. (supp. iv) 1472(l ..... ), makes it a crime to carry such a weapon "while aboard an aircraft being operated by an air carrier in air transportation." thus, ..... the indictment charged appellees with having violated 18 u.s.c. 1201, [ footnote 1 ] the federal kidnaping act. under court 2, appellees were charged with the commission of "aircraft piracy" in contravention of a 1961 amendment to 902 of the federal aviation act of 1958, 75 stat. 466, 49 u.s.c. (supp. iv) 1472(i). [ footnote .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... 50 f.supp. 462 (nd cal. 1943); united states v. cordova, 89 f.supp. 298 (edny 1950). in 1952, however, congress amended the criminal jurisdiction of admiralty to include crimes committed aboard aircraft while in flight over the high seas or any other waters within the admiralty jurisdiction of the united states except waters within the territorial jurisdiction ..... law, supra; nacirema co. v. johnson, 396 u. s. 212 , 396 u. s. 223 (1969). the longshoremen's and harbor workers' compensation act, 33 u.s.c. 901 et seq., was amended in 1972 to cover employees working on those areas of the shore customarily used in loading, unloading, repairing, or building a vessel. pub.l. no. 92 ..... of any state. 18 u.s.c. 7(5). [ footnote 12 ] the federal aviation act of 1958, 72 stat. 799, as amended, 49 u.s.c. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... to make the [regulatory scheme] work." silver v. new york stock exchange, 373 u.s. at 373 u. s. 357 . section 408 of the act has now been amended to require board approval when any person, whether or not engaged in any aspect of aeronautics, acquires a controlling interest in an air carrier. in this age ..... rather to the manner in which toolco executed the paper transactions, without board approval or knowledge. the leases were never considered in relation to other means of aircraft acquisition, as the complaint required they be viewed. the court dismisses these discrepancies by observing that the restraint alleged in pan american was held to be immune ..... properly resolved, in favor of debt financing, a longstanding dispute between the toolco and twa managements over the relative merits of debt or equity financing of new aircraft. the board concluded that toolco's financial and technical contributions to twa had been of considerable benefit to the carrier. on the other hand, the board viewed .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... retroactive effect. id., at 282 283, n. 35. the court, lastly, adds in a footnote that the fsia differs from the statutory amendment at issue in hughes aircraft because in hughes aircraft the jurisdictional limitation attached directly to the cause of action and so ensured that suit could be brought only in accordance with the jurisdictional provision ..... in the case, we concluded that 102 of the civil rights act of 1991 should not apply to cases arising before its enactment. 511 u. s., at 293. footnote 15 of course, the fsia differs from the statutory amendment at issue in hughes aircraft . that amendment was attached to the statute that created the cause of action, ..... 1187 (cd cal. 2001), and the court of appeals affirmed, 317 f. 3d 954 (ca9 2002), as amended, 327 f. 3d 1246 (2003). we granted certiorari limited to the question whether the foreign sovereign immunities act of 1976 (fsia or act), 28 u. s. c. 1602 et seq ., which grants foreign states immunity from the jurisdiction of federal .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... court. this is a case of first impression. the problem presented is whether respondents' property was taken within the meaning of the fifth amendment by frequent and regular flights of army and navy aircraft over respondents' land at low altitudes. the court of claims held that there was a taking, and entered judgment for respondent, one judge ..... of flight prescribed by the civil aeronautics authority is a public highway and part of the public domain, as declared by congress in the air commerce act of 1926, as amended by the civil aeronautics act of 1938. pp. 328 u. s. 260 -261, 328 u. s. 266 . (c) flights below that altitude are not within the ..... metes and bounds in order to synchronize air ownership with land ownership. i think that the constitution entrusts congress with full power to control all navigable airspace. congress has already acted under that power. it has by statute, 44 stat. 568, 52 stat. 973, provided that "the united states of america is . . . to possess and exercise .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... this does not result in payment of the full amount, the government will proceed to collect whatever may remain by suit against appellant. aircraft, on the other hand, both in the amended complaint and by the supporting affidavit of its president, alleged that no such sum as $270,000 was owing to it from, or ..... pay into the treasury of the united states moneys alleged to be due aircraft under contract provisions, but claimed by appellees to be payable to the government as excessive profits pursuant to the acts' terms. cf. notes 10 13 infra. [ footnote 8 ] the amended complaint alleges that appellant supplied materials to the department of the navy ..... of legislative power as well as contravene the due process and just compensation provisions of the fifth amendment, the jury trial provision of the seventh amendment, and the tenth amendment, it is said that the order under the second renegotiation act was based in part at least on information said to have been obtained from "governmental and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... the sale of military or naval supplies were contained in the vinson-trammel act of march 27, 1934, as amended (relating to naval vessels) and the merchant marine act of 1936, as amended (relating to construction of merchant ships). the act of april 3, 1939 extended percentage profit limitation to cover army aircraft contracts. the percentage of profit allowed to contractors was lowered to approximately 8 ..... % by the act of june 28, 1940, but the second supplemental national defense appropriation act, 1941, enacted september 9, 1940, provided .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit syllabus 1. the civil aeronautics board is without authority, under the civil aeronautics act of 1938, as amended, to fix a new mail rate for air carriers and to make it retroactive for a period in which a final rate previously fixed by ..... ratemaking which are peculiar to air carriers. that is true of the methods specified in 406(a) for ascertaining the rates of compensation -- "aircraft-mile, pound-mile, weight, space, or any combination thereof, or otherwise. . . ." special standards for ratemaking are also prescribed. the board is authorized to consider " ..... of 406(a), which empowers the board to "fix and determine" after notice and hearing "the fair and reasonable rates of compensation" for the transportation of mail by aircraft, [ footnote 3 ] reads like a typical public utility ratemaking authority. both subdivisions (a) and (b) of 406, to be sure, reflect some characteristics of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... ). the airport collects rent and fees from three groups of users: (1) commercial airlines, including petitioners; (2) "general aviation," i. e., corporate and privately owned aircraft not used for commercial, passenger, cargo, or military service; and (3) nonaeronautical concessionaires, including car rental agencies, the parking lot, restaurants, gift shops, "rent-a- ..... than those enumerated in subsection (a)," including, among other things, property and net income taxes, and that the act does not prohibit "reasonable rental charges, landing fees, and other service charges" collected from "aircraft operators for the use of airport facilities. " in the court's view, 1513(a) prohibits virtually all airport user ..... on them unreasonable and thus unlawful under the ahta, as added, 87 stat. 90, and as amended, 49 u. s. c. app. 1513, and the airport and airway improvement act of 1982 (aaia), 96 stat. 686, as amended, 49 u. s. c. app. 2210. the airlines also asserted that the airport's treatment .....
Tag this Judgment!