Legal Opinion
Aircrane, Inc. v. Butterfield
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 3, 1974No. Civ. A. 73-1964, 73-2173PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LUONGO, District Judge.
On August 10, 1973, regional officials of the Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter Agency or FAA) seized a Sikorsky H-37 rebuilt military surplus helicopter owned by Aircrane, Inc. and leased by Helicrane Construction Corporation (sometimes hereinafter referred to as Aircrane, Helicrane, or Owners). That seizure gave rise to two suits. The first suit was instituted by Air-crane and Helicrane against Butterfield, et al. (Civil Action No. 73-1964) in which Owners seek a declaration of unconstitutionally of those sections of the Federal Aviation Act and…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Bell v. BursonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Federal Aviation Administration and United States of America v. M. Marshall Landy and International Aircraft Leasing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
- DeVyver v. Warden, US PenitentiaryDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1974
- United States v. Vertol H21c, Registration No. N8540, in Rem, Aviation Contractors, Inc., Claimant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976
- Air East, Inc. v. National Transportation Safety BoardCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1975
- Landy v. Federal Aviation AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.