Patton v. Administrator of Civil Aeronautics
Decision Date | 17 June 1953 |
Docket Number | No. 7252.,7252. |
Citation | 112 F. Supp. 817 |
Parties | PATTON v. ADMINISTRATOR OF CIVIL AERONAUTICS et al. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Alaska |
Maurice T. Johnson, Fairbanks, Alaska, for plaintiff.
Robert J. McNealy, U. S. Atty., Fairbanks, Alaska, for defendants.
(a)(1) This is an action of a civil nature, brought to enjoin the enforcement of a regulation issued by the Administrator of Civil Aeronautics and filed December 11, 1951, which regulations are contained in Title 14, Civil Aviation, Chapter II, Civil Aeronautics Administration, Department of Commerce, Part 580, Anchorage Airport and Fairbanks Airport, and which regulation was published in the Federal Register December 12, 1951, Volume 16, No. 240, on page 12497.
This action arises under, and involves the interpretation of, Section 580.13 of said regulation, which regulation was issued on the basis of Sections 4 and 8 of the Alaska Airports Act, 62 Statutes 278, 48 U.S.C.A. § 485 et seq., and the said Section 580.13 dealing with taxicabs is in words and figures as follows:
The plaintiff is engaged in the operation of a bus service for the benefit of tourists who come to Alaska, and who arrive at the Fairbanks International Airport with bus transportation paid for at various places in the United States where the tourists buy their original tickets. The transportation on the plaintiff's busses and limousines is sold weeks and months ahead of time and is contracted for at many points throughout the United States wherever tourist tickets are sold. These tours include Arctic Coast Tour, of Wien Alaska Airlines, Arctic Alaska Tours, Yukon Valley Tours of Wien Alaska Airlines, and the like. Consequently the services of the plaintiff as operator of bus transportation and limousine service to and from the Fairbanks International Airport is all contracted for ahead of time and constitutes part of a general tourist service.
On or about the 5th day of August, 1952, the plaintiff received from U. M. Culver as Director of the Alaska Air Terminals Division, one of the defendants herein, a letter which is in words and figures as follows:
Upon receipt of the foregoing letter, the plaintiff made application to Mr. Frank Gray as Manager of the Fairbanks International Airport, a defendant above named, for a permit to operate on the Fairbanks International Airport in accordance with the provisions of said Section 580.13 of the regulation quoted above. This application is in words and figures as follows:
Subsequently, on or about the 21st day of August, 1952, the plaintiff received from Frank Gray, as Airport Manager of the Fairbanks International Airport, one of the defendants above named, a letter stating that the plaintiff's application had been denied for the reason that the Yellow Cab Company had been given an exclusive permit to operate on the Fairbanks International Airport; this letter is in words and figures as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wendler v. City of Great Bend
...83 A.L.R. 315; Department of Treasury v. City of Evansville, 1945, 223 Ind. 435, 60 N.E.2d 952; Patton v. Administrator of Civil Aeronautics, D.C.Alaska, 4th Div., 1953, 112 F.Supp. 817; Heitman v. City of Lake City, 1947, 225 Minn. 117, 30 N.W.2d 18; Behnke v. City of Moberly, Mo.App.1951,......
-
Wren v. City of Corsicana
...83 A.L.R. 315; Department of Treasury v. City of Evansville, 1945, 223 Ind. 435, 60 N.W.2d 952; Patton v. Administrator of Civil Aeronautics, D.C.Alaska, 4th Div., 1953, 112 F.Supp. 817; Heitman v. City of Lake City, 1947, 225 Minn. 117, 30 N.W.2d 18; Behnke v. City of Moberly, Mo.App.1951,......
-
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, ETC. v. Tureaud
...Cir., 160 F.2d 35; Kelly v. Dowd, 7 Cir., 140 F.2d 81; Donnelly Garment Co. v. Dubinsky, 8 Cir., 154 F. 2d 38; Patton v. Administrator of Civil Aeronautics, D.C., 112 F.Supp. 817, to compel his admission. Certainly no member of the white race could obtain such relief from such a source by s......
-
Ricotta v. City of Buffalo
...privileges at Airports for airline operations, parking lots and taxi-cabs have been uniformly sustained. See Patton v. Administrator of Civil Aeronautics, D. C., 112 F.Supp. 817; Arcangel v. Holling, 258 App.Div. 180, 15 N.Y.S.2d 975; Miami Beach Airlines Service v. Crandon, 159 Fla. 504, 3......