top of page
Federal regulation 47506 ("1980") applies to people in the airport's federal noise contour zone. Burlingame, Hillsborough, and San Mateo are NOT in the noise contour zone; most of Millbrae and San Bruno are not, either.
The defense portrayed this federal regulation as a firm law. Plaintiffs trusted the defense's statement. Court commissioners' rulings mirrored it. 75% of plaintiffs were denied compensation. People got the message that filing an "ongoing nuisance claim" in small claims court is futile unless you bought your current home by 1980.
The "1980" claim ruled out people under 65, people who rent, people who may have married a "qualified" spouse after 1980, people who arrived on the Peninsula after 1980, people who bought "1980" homes but no longer own them; all are examples of what the defense's claim portrayed as legitimate.
Did CCSF wield this defense in order to avoid its legal responsibility for airport ground noise?
1) What does U. S. Code Title 49: Transportation, section 41713 b) (1) say about the defense's use of a federal statue shield in small claims court?
“Congress expressly provided that the proprietary powers and rights of municipal airport owners are not preempted by Federal law, 49 U. S. C. 41713 (section 105 of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978). Thus, the task of protecting the local population from airport noise has fallen to the agency, usually the local government, that owns and operates the airport."
Source: 43816. Federal Register, Vo., 65, No. 136/Friday, July 14, 2000/Notices
2) What's the Judicial Council, and what's its position on the use of federal statues in small claims court?
The Judicial Council of California, that oversees the California Rules of Court, provides a very helpful online law librarian service. I asked if a federal statute can be applied in small claims court. "In general, if the small claims court is handling a state issue, federal statues would not apply or be binding on the small claims court, even if a party presents the statue in its arguments to the court......This is my summary of jurisdiction of courts in the United States at federal and state levels." - LawLibrarian107
Date: 12:34. 2020/5/12
Question ID: 15448053
The FAA mandates that the owner of the airport is responsible for the harm caused by ground noise, not the FAA.
bottom of page