Hinman v. Pacific Air Transport
Case Overview
Hinman (P) sued to enjoin Pacific Air Transport (D) from flying its airplanes over his house and for damages resulting from the flights that had already occurred.
Facts of the Case
Airplanes operated by Pacific Air Transport (“Pacific”) regularly flew at altitudes of less than 100 feet over Hinman’s land. Hinman requested that Pacific stop these flights, but Pacific disregarded the requests. Hinman then sued, arguing that the ad coelum rule gave him the right to prevent aircraft from flying above his land and that such flights were trespasses.
Issues
Does the ad coelum rule create an unlimited property right to the airspace above a person’s land, so that flying an airplane over that land constitutes trespass?
Holding
The ad coelum rule does not confer an unlimited right to restrict access to the airspace above one’s land.
Analysis
The ad coelum rule was never meant to be taken literally, and the interpre- tation of the ad coelum rule advocated by Hinman would result in absurd consequences. Holding that Pacific’s overflights constitute trespass would al- low every landowner to prevent airplanes from flying above his or her land. Such a rule would be unenforceable.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
The best place for complete law school case briefs and law-related news. Want to advertise or post sponsored content? contact us at mrmetropolitan@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The Ins and Outs of Class Action Lawsuits: A Comprehensive Guide
Sometimes, you may buy a product only to find it defective. To make it worse, your search for the product reveals mass complaints. You can ...
-
Class 1: Elements of Fundamental Value: Present Value, Future Value, Net Present Value: Elements of Fundamental Value (38) One year : ...
-
I can help you land in the top 10% of your law school class. Imagine, how your life would be different if you were in the top 10% o...
-
Case Brief: Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc. 489 U.S. 141 (1989) Facts: In this case, Bonito Boats, Inc. (Bonito) and Thunder...
No comments:
Post a Comment