AIRPORT NOISE LAW
PRACTICE

American Jurisprudence
Federal Practice
California Practice
Corpus Juris Secundum
Expert Witnesses
Court Documents

Revised November 30, 2003





American Jurisprudence

COMPLAINT


PROOF


TRIAL

Return to index


Federal Practice

CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS

Title 14 (Aeronautics and Space)

Chapter I: Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation

Title 40 (Protection of Environment)


FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE (WEST)


FEDERAL PROCEDURE, LAWYERS EDITION (WEST)


WEST'S FEDERAL PRACTICE MANUAL

Return to index


California Practice

29 CALIFORNIA JURISPRUDENCE 3d


CALIFORNIA FORMS OF PLEADING AND PRACTICE


CALIFORNIA CIVIL PRACTICE

Real Property Litigation

Torts

Return to index


Corpus Juris Secundum

See Nuisance (66 C.J.S.), especially:

Return to index


Expert Witnesses

Several agencies that list expert witnesses have websites, and many of these have searchable directories. Some even permit free access to resumes and published articles by listed experts. An excellent starting point in the search for experts is Expert Witness Internet Resources, a directory of Web links compiled by the Northern California Association of Law Libraries.

Expert Pages -- Free on-line national directory of experts. No fees to directory owners. Website has sophisticated search-engine. Categories include acoustics.

Expert Witness Network -- Some free public resources, but a subscription fee ($99 per year) is required to access most on-line resources, including a mail-list for queries to participating experts and lawyers.

JurisPro Expert Witness Directory

Legal Experts Network

Noble's Expert Directory

Technical Advisory Service for Attorneys -- This referral service maintains a large listing of experts available for consultation on preparation of litigation or as expert witnesses. Categories include acoustics and noise pollution. There is no fee for consultation with TASA staff until you establish a contract with an expert referred by them, when a one-time $75 administrative fee is charged. TASA quotes specific rates for each expert. No contingency fees.


Return to index


Court Documents

COMPLAINTS

Challenge to Environmental Impact Report

Citizens Against Airport Pollution v. City of San Jose, California
(July 14, 1997, Santa Clara Co. Superior Ct.)

City of Alameda v. Port of Oakland
(Jan. 15, 1998, Alameda Co. Superior Ct.)

City of San Leandro v. Port of Oakland
(Jan. 14, 1998, Alameda Co. Superior Ct.)

El Toro Reuse Planning Authority et al. v. Board of Supervisors for the County of Orange
(San Diego Co. Superior Ct., SC710121, Judge Judith McConnell)

Injunctive Relief

National Resources Defense Council et al. v. Baltimore-Washingtion International Airport
(March 16, 1998, U.S. District Court for Maryland)


MEMORANDA OF LAW

City of Bridgeton v. Slater -- petition for review of FAA approval of airport expansion, including new runway, at Lambert-St. Louis International Airport. (U.S. Ct. App. 8th Cir.)

Petitioner's opening brief (March 3, 1999)

Amicus brief, brief by three TWA captains.

Amicus brief, brief by Air Traffic Controllers Association, Local T-75.

Grand Canyon Trust v. FAA -- petition for review of FAA's environmental assessment of replacement airport near Zion National Park. See court decision granting petition (U.S. Ct. App. D.C. Cir., 2002)

Petitioner's opening brief (oral argument April 11, 2002)

Respondent FAA's brief

Petitioner's reply brief

Illinois v. City of Chicago (Cir. Ct. 18th Jud. Cir., DuPage Co., Wheaton)

Brief in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment, a masterful treatment of airport proprietor liability, retention of state law remedies for damages due to aviation, and case law supporting recovery for noise damages under nuisance and condemnation theories.

Save Our Heritage v. FAA -- petition for review of FAA approval of scheduled commuter service at rural airport. Of particular interest in this case is the issue whether the FAA's properly invoked a "categorical exclusion" to avoid analysis of environmental impacts. (U.S. Ct. App. 1st Cir.)

Petitioners' opening brief

Respondent FAA's brief

Return to index

Home Page