Comment from Alan Farkas, SmithAmundsen Aerospace

Document ID: NTSB-GC-2011-0001-0044
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: National Transportation Safety Board
Received Date: December 17 2012, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Date Posted: December 17 2012, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: October 16 2012, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: December 17 2012, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 1jw-82l3-jm96
View Document:  View as format xml

View Comment

In the interest of remaining true to the intent of the Pilot's Bill of Rights while recognizing the abilities of the Federal Judiciary, 821.64 should be revised to recognize that review at the District Court level affords the respondent a DeNovo trial on the merits, whereas an appeal to the appropriate Court of Appeals (from either the District Court, or directly from the Board's decision) should be confined to the record compiled (by the District Court or Board, respectively). Note, in addition to representing respondents in Board proceedings, I serve as Chairman of the Legal Advisory Council of Experimental Aviation Association.

Related Comments

    View All
Total: 11
Comment from FAA
Public Submission    Posted: 11/01/2012     ID: NTSB-GC-2011-0001-0035

Dec 17,2012 11:59 PM ET
Comment from Christopher Dunn, GeoVelo, LLC
Public Submission    Posted: 11/18/2012     ID: NTSB-GC-2011-0001-0036

Dec 17,2012 11:59 PM ET
Comment from Hays Hettinger, Carstens & Cahoon, LLP
Public Submission    Posted: 11/18/2012     ID: NTSB-GC-2011-0001-0037

Dec 17,2012 11:59 PM ET
Comment from Jerre Dixon
Public Submission    Posted: 12/15/2012     ID: NTSB-GC-2011-0001-0043

Dec 17,2012 11:59 PM ET
Comment from Alan Farkas, SmithAmundsen Aerospace
Public Submission    Posted: 12/17/2012     ID: NTSB-GC-2011-0001-0044

Dec 17,2012 11:59 PM ET