Legal Opinion

Dhl Corporation v. Civil Aeronautics Board

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided October 26, 1978No. 78-1054PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KILKENNY, Circuit Judge:

Before us for disposition is the petition of DHL Corporation for a review of the order of the respondent dismissing its application for the issuance of a certificate for all-cargo air service pursuant to the provisions of 49 U.S.C. § 1388. We affirm.

BACKGROUND

On November 9, 1977, the Federal Aviation Act was amended by adding a new section 418 (49 U.S.C. § 1388), empowering the Board to issue operating certificates, to conduct “all-cargo air service” between the fifty states, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. This legislation provided, among other things, for the…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Patagonia Corporation v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve SystemCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
  2. American Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics BoardCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1949
  3. Monarch Travel Services, Inc. v. Associated Cultural Clubs, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1972
  4. Consolidated Flower Shipments, Inc.—bay Area v. Civil Aeronautics BoardCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1954
  5. Hughes Air Corp. v. Civil Aeronautics BoardCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Bautista Castillo-Felix v. Immigration & Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979
  2. Praman Chiravacharadhikul A.K.A. Praman Chiravacharadhijul v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1981
  3. Commercial Union Insurance v. Alitalia Airlines, S.p.A.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003
  4. Royal Insurance v. Amerford Air CargoDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1987
  5. Motorola, Inc., a Corporation Fireman's Fund Insurance Company, a Corporation v. Federal Express Corporation, and Kuehne & Nagel, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API