Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Product Liability Law & StrategyLJN NewslettersNewsSections

Third Circuit Limits Scope on Federal Preemption in Aviation Cases

By Steven R. Pounian and Justin T. Green
August 01, 2016

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit's 1999 decision in Abdullah v. American Airlines, 181 F.3d 363 (3d Cir. 1999), dropped a bombshell with its sweeping declaration that the Federal Aviation Act (FA Act) (Pub.L. No. 85-726, 72 Stat. 731 (codified as amended at 49 U.S.C. ” 40101-49105)) and its regulations preempt the “entire field” of air safety. While state law historically provided the foundation for nearly all aviation injury and death suits, Abdullah dramatically shifted the landscape, sparking motions to dismiss state law claims and forcing plaintiffs to undertake the often futile task of delineating a federal law basis for their actions. Earlier this year, however, in Sikkelee v. Precision Airmotive Corp., Slip op. No. 14-4193 (3d Cir. April 19, 2016), the Third Circuit sharply limited the scope of Abdullah's field preemption ruling, holding that it does not extend to state product liability claims.

Sikkelee concluded that Abdullah “does not govern product liability claims” and that such claims “may proceed using a state standard of care.” Slip op. at 5, 18. The Third Circuit observed that the field preemption declared by Abdullah was limited to “in-air” operations. Id. at 18.

Abdullah

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.