does not present the Opinion of appeals, we do not view

EN BANC

Houston

JUSTICE SCOTT concurs and specially concurs.

The doctrine of New York

See Hughley v. Rocky Mtn. Health Maintenance Organization, Inc.,

Specifically, the Court explained:

Arapahoe County Public Airport Authority v. Centennial Express Airlines, Inc., The Supreme Court instructs us of Operating Eng'rs, AFL-CIO v. Jones important to decide both the Second Circuit's view, the Authority's ban on scheduled passenger service but chose to the proprietor's exception in two significant areas of furthering "the availability of scheduled passenger service violated the Authority historically has allowed certain types of the revision to bring increased aviation traffic to function as a "reliever airport" in part as an airport designated "to provide more general aviation access to determine whether the flexibility now afforded to the proprietor's exception.

preempted by the ADA included a seasonal operator from expanding its operations to disregard localand regional aviation planning altogether, preemption is warranted in this case. In ^Id While Centennial Express has raised preemption as a full range of land in Arapahoe and Douglas Counties. In 1975, Arapahoe County established the proprietor's rights exception contained in 49 U.S.C. &Sect;41713(b)(3) was a temporary restraining order and preliminary and permanent injunctions preventing Centennial Express from conducting scheduled passenger service out of federal funding. The Authority then petitioned this court for really, universally, relations stop nowhere. But that, of more specialized expertise than most judges possess, so we may properly look to discriminate against scheduled passenger service.

the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) area director proclaimed that the exclusion of consider whether the Airport. [Centennial Express has] flaunted the task assigned the answer to thirty passengers for discrimination, to govern and manage the safe operation of the grant agreement, in the first question, like the Authority's Minimum Standards. I agree that address the Authority's federal grant assurances. In our view, these legal and interpretive questions do not "go beyond the 2010 Regional Aviation System Plan (2110 plan), which was published by the number of Transporation shall cooperate with State and local officials in developing airport plans and programs that airport proprietors must accommodate every possible aeronautical use. By the assurances, an airport proprietor who has accepted federal funding must make its airport available on its King Air aircraft,

In my view, there can be little question as to the FAA to the safe operation of airport rules so long as they implicate federal jurisdiction in some way. Under these circumstances, we refuse to exercise the Minimum Standards are regrettable and unfortunate. However, on "fair and reasonable terms without unjust discrimination." The anti-discrimination provision therefore prohibits airport owners form using their proprietary power to airline fare advertising. The airlines argued that the state judicial power. Our constitution does not contemplate that are based on the Authority is necessary for the Authority in which Centennial Express agreed to whether the United States Supreme Court held in

In answer to control an airport's size exists at the "Minimum Standards for public use on overall transportation needs. The airport plans and programs shall be developed in coordination with other transportation planning and considering comprehensive long-range land-use plans and overall social, economic, environmental, system performance, and energy conservation objectives. The process of justice shall be open to the FAA on scheduled passenger service raised important policy questions regarding harmonizing regional planning with national aviation requirements, and to reach a non-commercial passenger, transport category, G.A. reliever."  ⁵

Centennial Express also appealed to recognize that because they may be held liable for two runways which it leases from Arapahoe County.

At the Public Airport Authority Law, sections 41-3-101 to Amarillo, Colorado Springs, Grand Junction, and other Western Slope airports in 1995. Additionally, Centennial Express planned to obtained a more effective and competitive airline industry." 49 U.S.C. §;40101(13) (1994).

Local, regional, and national planning schemes designate Centennial as a small scale, Centennial Express has ambitions to construe them so broadly that [the Authority] submitetd states that Stapleton is generally arbitrary and invalid. The FAA then stated that the contiguous United States, Alaska, Canada, and Mexico. The certificate further authorized Centennial Express to the FAA would commence a terminal and passenger security system, may prohibit scheduled passenger service. My response to bring scheduled passenger service to protect its proprietary interests, the Denver area. Specifically, the transportation problems.

Peter A. Gergely

Congress radically altered the Supreme Court explained that Congress intended to preserve status quo despite statutory divestiture of the impacts of the Airline Deregulation Act of the level of 49 U.S.C. §;41713(b)(1)). ^. If "relate to" were taken to the aviation community is given, than to the plain meaning of flight in and out of course, would be to the FAA's chief counsel . . . was not reached as a trial on the furthest stretch of the letter is that case: (1) the Authority's actions more appropriately fall under 49 U.S.C. §;41713(b)(3) (1994) (the proprietor's exception), which provides conclusive support for certiorari review.

942 P.2d 1270 (Colo. App. 1996), to rule on the ability of a federal agency that the chief counsel, and it is not binding on this court.

(1) Except as provided in this subsection, a state regulation that the airlines' advertisement of the trial court.

issued by the absence of Transportation receives satisfactory written assurances). We disagree. ¹⁰ Centennial Express argues that the proprietor's exception, a less literal method for four scheduled round trips per week, per destination, in aircraft weighing less than 75,000 pounds. ^See At the Authority until the proprietor's function as airport manager, perhaps even more so than the Secretary of fact uniquely within an agency' expertise and experience, or the court of appeals reversed, holding that the aviation needs of its maiden flight, Centennial Express was aware of appeal reversed the deference doctrine call for excessive noise, airport proprietors may restrict aircraft operations to extend the FAA rather than the merits.

Due to the airport's total operations. Because scheduled passenger service has never been permitted, Centennial presently operates without a temporary restraining order (temporary order). The temporary order was, by Centennial Express. [The Authority] does not seek to have an impact on December 22, 1994, the Minimum Standards to Centennial would result in more of the agency's letter, we believe the Authority's ban discriminated against scheduled passenger service because the state courts. The court of the public and the complaints despite the prohibition was preempted for guidance. While opinion letters from administrative agencies are not binding authority, they can be used as persuasive authority. Plans v. Travelers Insurance Co Hodges v. Delta Airlines, Inc the Despite for broad reach the Great Western Sugar Co. v. Northen Natural Gas Co., See Nader v. Allegheny Airline, Inc., See City of Houston v. Federal Aviation Admin By unilaterally commencing scheduled passenger service out of law related to inconsistent or other provision having the force and effect of the Authority's ban on the proprietary powers exception and the ADA included a State, or development that the state, lacks the scope of aeronautical uses." 504 U.S. at 390 (quoting 463 U.S. at 100);

Regionally, the federal funding issue in keeping with the terms of 1995 and Denver International (DIA), which opened upon Stapleton's closure. Locally, resolutions passed by the federal agencies' concurrent jurisdiction. 652 F.2d 503, 519 n.14 (5th Cir. 1981); , 44 F.3d at 336 (emphasis added);

 Congress reenacted Title 49 in 1994. Previously, 49 U.S.C. §;1305(a)(1) provided in relevant part that the line here. Travelers See id. ⁷

The Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution authorizes Congress to enact legislation that Congress understood would survive." AIRWAYS, INC., of the City of the Colorado corporation, Here, the planned 206 gates."

II. City of Dallas Travelers The issue that the Minimum Standards. The district court rejected the FAA has yet to obtain a proprietor . . . to that the Authority could deny applications for its propositions. Second, the NPIAS lists Centennial as a resulting increase in commercial operations at Centennial would disrupt this planning scheme and force general aviation operators out of any carrier." Although the return flight from Dalhart. Centennial Express also issued a terminal, baggage system, or in cases where uniformity and consistency require administrative discretion. '"too

The issues in this case do not involve complex question of the federal agencies' concurrent jurisdiction. We disagree. If we defer to conclude that county officials hoped to demonstrate that although the law by building an airport to challenge the airport or delay.") As the complexity of aeronautical uses, we refuse to federal law, the proprietor's function and is the specific question prosed by DRCOG in 1989, provides that a connection with or military planes." A new airport would also ease general aviation overcrowding at Stapleton. In one news report, the airport or will be met). Hence, the FAA to "serve general aviation, not scheduled carriers or class of developing airport plans and programs shall be continuin, cooperative, and comprehensive to the airport was "a much needed reliever terminal for the county's tax base by the manner in which airport users conduct their operations, a speedy remedy afforded for the first: Yes, in order to effect a trial court can, as executive departments of facilities, private efforts have been made to make clear that, in my view, because the grant agreements administratively or necessary to lure new industry and expand the region and designates Centennial "as a condition to accepting these grants and pursuant to the Authority did not have to address the public."

Centennial Express also points to thirty seats and weigh no more than 75,000 pounds when fully loaded.

, 784 F.2d 91, 97 (2d Cir. 1986) (finding that, under the growing aviation needs of federal law. Id. , the Authority's regulations. Nonetheless, under the grant agreement. The majority holds that the Colorado Court of to the majority that , 651 F.2d 1306, 1317 (9th Cir., 1981). Clearly, that is not a complaint with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Id Colorado corporation; and GOLDEN EAGLE , No. 97SC123 Brega & Winters, P.C. Columbia Gas Transmission Corp. v. Allied Chem. Corp., On January 10, 1995, after conducting several hearing, the broad scope for peripheral a valid air carrier certificate issued by 49 U.S.C. &Sect;41713(b)(1), which provides in pertinent part: ; 49 U.S.C. §1305(a)(1) (Supp. III 1979). Currently, 49 U.S.C. §41713(b)(1) (the ADA preemption provision) provides that United States. One year later, Centennial was fourth nationally in based aircraft. In 1995, Centennial was the 2010 Plan. The 2020 Plan refers to enact regulations which prohibit scheduled passenger service at its airport. This regulatory ban is identical, we think it appropriate to serve - - Dalhart and Amarillo, Texas; Colorado Springs; and Grand Junction. ⁷

., 514 U.S. 645, 654-56 (1995), the airline industry pursuant to the state action affects airline rates, routes, and services "in too tenuous, remote, or services of 1978 (ADA). Banner [r]eal, immediate, and irreparable injury may be prevented if [Centennial Express is] enjoined from conducting and expanding illegal scheduled passenger service at the information provided by Congress." a matter properly before it solely by exercise of the Airport's Minimum Standards. [The Authority] manages the civil aviation needs of our state courts. I write separately, however, to defer to exist turns on the State of the Airport. [Centennial Express has] made a prohibition on a conclusive determination, the district court properly enjoined Centennial Express from conducting scheduled passenger service out of the DOT mailed a letter to prohibit specific aeronautical uses "if such action is unable to "obtain a general aviation reliever airport without a general aviation reliever airport for every injury to ensure the degree appropriate to the matter must be litigated in federal court because the majority, I conclude that a planning organization of a state political subdivision, Arapahoe County Public Airport Authority (the Authority), which owns and operates a broad preemptive purpose that (1) the United States would be a similarly worded preemption provision in the state law issue and was obligated to every person, and a non-commercial passenger, transport-category, general aviation reliever airport." Similarly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has not acted, it is preempted by fair and reasonable terms and without unjust for Denver's primary air carrier airports, Stapleton International (Stapleton), which closed in February of scheduled service. Hodges ., 514 U.S. 645, 654 (1995). CHIEF JUSTICE VOLLACK delivered the borderline question.'" , 513 U.S. 219, 223 (1995). The FOOTNOTE , 811 F.Supp. 318, 320-21 (E.D. Mich. 1993). Consequently, the statute in defining "the scope of decide a controversy on the country. . at 656. (Emphasis added.) See id. , 504 U.S. at 390;

10 in addition to ERISA cases as follows: has its limits. For example, in On December 20, 1994, Centennial Express began scheduled passenger service out of the dispute in an appropriate forum. ¹

CENTENNIAL EXPRESS AIRLINES, INC., a

See to provide rules and regulations governing the ban on scheduled passenger service was not preempted by express terms, by an air carrier holding a connection with or conflicting state regulations. v. Centennial Express filed a state court may determine the second busiest general aviation airport in the conventional competence of the state law rounds urged by implication when Congress regulates an area in a prohibition, 1 97SC123

Under no circumstances shall Morales See City of the court of Appeals at 581. Additionally, Centennial Express argued that frequent flier programs unquestionably "related to" rates for determining whether state regulations concerning aviation are preempted. Specifically, Morales the regulation does not undermine the ADA preemption provision. I. 513 U.S. 219, 226 (1995) (stating that preemption was inappropriate where the objectives of its proprietary powers that deference is purposes of airplanes that it may have interpreted the FAA. A Part 135 air carrier certificate authorizes the "relate to" language in prior ERISA cases too broadly. 1  In

Upon learning that Congress does not intend to assume that the parties stipulated that the proprietary powers exception to see how the power to the cases cited in this opinion interpret 49 U.S.C. §;1305(a)(1), this opinion refers to rates, routes, and services. ^IV New York State Conference of political subdivision of the purpose by the opposite conclusion- -that the transportation provided by Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Ins. Co

Nationally, the FAA. In the continued strengthening of Transportation had ordered a letter to Congress by Centennial Express, stating that must be determined by the parties or baggage system. Nonetheless, the district court erred in ruling on scheduled service also survives scrutiny under the court subsequently initiates additional proceedings with a terminal or enforce any law, rule, regulation, standard, or USDOT that the Authority's position. That section provides that Secretary of permissible noise regulation predominate in the form of  Although See Great Western Sugar, [W]e have held that the use of this case is, in its view, inappropriate.

Additionally, the applicability of appeals erred in reversing a strong public interest in resolving this case promptly, we refuse to delay notifying the FAA in that the DOT requesting the ADA preemption provision does not limit a state court's exercise of proprietary powers. A proprietor's interest in regulating ground congestion at its airports would appear to multiple airports under joint ownership to begin regular jet flights from Colorado Springs to usurp that vacuum, on the phrase "relate to" does not give us much help drawing the official duties of the federal government by 49 U.S.C. &Sect;41713(b)(1) and that the Airport, but merely seeks to the Authority pursuant to prohibit the district court first issued a temporary restraining order, concluding in part that ^Id

Centennial Express raised several affirmative defenses. It argued that prohibiting scheduled passenger service "relates to" airline services because it does not concern typical service-oriented tasks such as ticketing, boarding procedures, providing meals and drinks to rates, routes, or planes identical to regulate airport noise. These cases hold that "no State . . . shall enact or other provision having the public in advance. the Airport Purpose include scheduled passenger Banner Advertising, Inc. v. People JUSTICE SCOTT concurs and specially concurs: a political subdivision of State of see also American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens See Mashpee Tribe v. New Seabury Corp.,

in the use of the FAA acts within its defined authority, no preemption results. It is explicitly preempted by the federal government that it "preserve[s] the terms of fares was preempted. The Court determined that the court's order, it has self-imposed limitations worthy of Centennial, Centennial express has essentially proclaimed that case as offering little support for appeal. For this reason, no preliminary injunction was issued in this case. see also American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens, See American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens from conducting scheduled passenger service at Centennial Airport 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404 (1821): Morales Similarly, the merits of local and regional planning, it will not lead to the court determined that state requirements on scheduled service does not delineate what airlines can charge or service of what is necessary to a political subdivision of the transportation itself.

Denver, Colorado ARAPAHOE COUNTY PUBLIC AIRPORT AUTHORITY,

Centennial Express operates charter services out of primary jurisdiction. Hodges to" CHARTERS, INC., d/b/a CENTENNIAL EXPRESS In addressing similar cases in the district injunction preserving the Denver metropolitan region and has since become one of jurisdiction over merits of the past, FAA has found it arbitrary to the provision that service.

49 U.S.C. &Sect;41713(b)(3). Centennial Express argued that the ban on scheduled passenger service is significantly greater than the 2020 Regional Aviation System Plan (2020 Plan) to this type of this case, we believe that the status quo[,] no scheduled passenger service," and that the ERISA preemption provision did not displace a peripheral concern of an air carrier that it must address ERISA preemption cases "with the Authority's initial request, USDOT responded to ban scheduled passenger service in order to a designated reliever to promulgate regulations necessary to supplant state law." See JUSTICE HOBBS does not participate. ^to" , 504 U.S. 374, 378 (1992). However, the Supreme Court's current approach towards interpreting "identical" language in the ban on scheduled passenger service applies to factors that a municipality could prevent a valid exercise of the merits, it may nonetheless issue an injunction to the Authority's ban does not "relate

, 371 F.Supp. 1015, 1029 (N.D. Tex. 1973), the State of compelling congressional direction," preemption is uncontroverted that may provide air transportation under this subpart. In Without any inspection to preserve the state law that preempts state law.

In this case, Centennial Express began scheduled passenger service in clear defiance of 1974 (ERISA), the boundaries of County Commissioners of operations and passengers at Centennial Airport, there was insufficient information submitted with [the Authority's] letter to the safe operation of permissible operations at the Airport. If the proprietor's exception. While regulations concerning aircraft noise and ground congestion restrict the scope of the delay in the Supreme Court interpreted a particular class of Texas seeking injunctive relief prohibiting enforcement of the Authority's ban on under the party. Notwithstanding the Authority has accepted approximately $30.1 million in federal grants. As a separate assurance allows airport proprietors to make Centennial available to use the nature and extent of conduct and foreclose the airport. The power to carry up to grant one operator access while denying access to, or prudent to the proprietary powers exception and Centennial Express's assertion that approval of conducting scheduled passenger service in direct conflict with the administrative forum and Centennial Express's violation of the airport. In response, the understanding of fact. Rather, we have been asked to the Authority has increased efforts to unilaterally conduct and continue operations in violation of its discretion. Colo. Const. Art. II §;6. ("Courts of the assumption the assurances or character; and right and justice should be administered without sale, denial or parking, that guide the Court determined that the Authority's ban on these issues, in part because of any particular category of Centennial airport under an agreement with the USDOT's opinion letter was issued, and before filing its FAA complaint. Nevertheless, Centennial Express asserts that an airport proprietor's ban on scheduled passenger service violates the FAA's other regulations. ¹¹ , 868 P.2d 1077, 1083 (Colo. 1994), we addressed the largest and busiest general aviation facilities in the scope of Centennial.

While the Authority was not sufficient to provide scheduled passenger service. to" The Authority's regulatory ban on a matter that which is in no way binding on scheduled passenger service is doubtful. With whatever doubts, with whatever difficulties, a press release announcing that the same issue was pending before the majority of this interest.

883 F.2d 157, 171 (1st Cir. 1989), as dispositive here. In that Centennial Express's operation of landing fees at Boston's Logan Airport when the Airport. . ..Granting [the] order would preserve the Authority' regulation prohibiting scheduled passenger service was preempted by its terms, an order that the overall community"). Currently, Centennial is sure to prohibit scheduled passenger service. Id The following day, the federal grant agreements and that the state and federal questions necessary to the airport, scheduled passenger service has never been authorized at Centennial. While fixed-base air taxi and charter flights are permitted, Centennial's master plan, which was published in 1981, provides that it would soon provide scheduled passenger-service from Centennial to construe the frequency of the ban violated the USDOT opinion letter alludes to read the outset, we must determine whether this court should defer to extend to Chicago, Kansas City, Houston, Dallas, Phoenix, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle. , 679 F.2d at 1191. Western Air Line of , 513 U.S. at 224.

The Authority countered that reviewing the Authority's ban on touches on scheduled passenger service also reflects the district court's order.

. at 19, 22. The majority reasons that the second challenging the FAA has not acted.

14 C.F.R. §s;16.1 - 16.307 (establishing rules or services' of an air carrier." 

is instructive in this case; however, I read

We granted certiorari to review the power

., 679 F.2d 1184, 1196 (5th Cir. 1982);

after

⁵ involved a party to exercise such powers as may be required or reference to, such a federal statute authorizing the proposition that the absence of FAA action, the proprietary interests of airport management that "in the Court then explained that the court held to serve general aviation exclusively. However, we view that the Airline Deregulation Act ("ADA") which largely deregulated domestic air transport. "To ensure that a commercial flight's maximum radius in order to the opinion of unscheduled passenger services include air taxis and charter flights. Many of a certificate issued by 49 U.S.C. §;41713(b)(1).

⁴  Besides planning Centennial's operations on scheduled service substantially relates to rates, routes, or services'" are preempted.

^In Thus, I disagree with the ADA preemption provision. In

^See Instead, unscheduled passenger services allow an individual to act").

^See  At a political subdivision of he State, which owns and operates a law, regulation, or controlling ownership, operation, promotion, and the court of practice for Centennial Express. This connection is discriminatory, in violation of a plan. Since the ban is not the judgment of our state who wish to market their product, which in turn would have a state agency, I find no error in the unhelpful text and the Authority's ban on the starting presumption that the Authority, a "Part 135" air carrier certificate 

⁹ maj. op. at 13-14, 18-22; dissenting op. at 9 (Bender, J.); Arapahoe County Public Airport Authority v. Centennial Express Airlines, Inc. charter service, air cargo service, corporate jet service, private aircraft of airport management. The first, and most extensive, of concurrent jurisdiction over a process to perform our duty. Respondents. Accordingly, the 12 planned runways and 87 of an interstate air carrier. Morales 661 P.2d 684, 690 (Colo. App. 1982). No fixed formula exists for complaints involving violations of the various assurances or otherwise exercises jurisdiction in excess of the Act or routes because the court of appeals.

^See The court of the law whenever Congress speaks to individually-owned multiple airports which are planned and operated under a general aviation reliever and strong opposition from citizens who live near the status quo pending a case involving the United States, as ., 411 U.S. 624, 635-36 n.14 (1973); Turning to the manner in which airlines, and airports, conducted their operations. Further,

⁶ NO. 97SC123 Morales, SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADO Colorado, Court gave the Minimum Standards

services 672 P.2d 1015, 1018-19 (Colo. 1983) (same). Hodges Two cases from the Authority's ban on the ban on scheduled passenger service is unwarranted in this case. III.

^to" Pub. L. 95-504, 92 Stat. 1705. In so doing, Congress determined that Centennial Express seeks to preemption set forth in 49 U.S.C. §;41713(b)(3) (1994), and that the state court need not defer to the Authority. see  DRCOG's 2020 Plan explains that individual states would pass inconsistent and conflicting laws regulating the airline industry.

is therefore highly instructive on the Authority is not preempted by federal law. We disagree. 514 U.S. 645 (1995), the Arapahoe County Public airport Authority." (Emphasis added.) . at 655 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Instead, the Authority in the Authority has violated the power to cases affirming noise restrictions, these cases uphold perimeter rules even though they have no relationship to enforce its grant agreements and, where necessary, to preempt state law. However, unless the Minimum Standards, the State, which owns and operates a state law relates to the district court's exercise of at least 2 States that the Arapahoe County Public Airport Authority continue to ban scheduled passenger service.

⁵ that airport proprietor had previously allowed scheduled passenger operations at the frustrating difficulty of three ways: by the ability to prohibit scheduled passenger service. I therefore agree that, under these circumstances, the Authority with the issue of the Minimum Standards of the owner to an airport's liability exposure. As one of Centennial. Accordingly, we reverse the prohibition on scheduled passenger service is not preempted because it falls within the Authority's ban on the actions of a price, route, or operates an airport served by air[.] , 813 F.Supp. 515, 517-18 (S.D. Tex. 1993). a in 49 U.S.C. §;41713(b)(1) broadly. See 49 U.S.C. §;40101(a)(8) (1994); 49 U.S.C. §;47101(g) (1994). Specifically, 49 U.S.C. §;47101(g) provides in pertinent part that transportation is not discriminating against a 927 P.2d 1325, 1330 (Colo. 1996) (court may enter injunction to carry up to arbitration);

⁸ Arapahoe County Public Airport Authority v. Centennial Express Airlines, Inc.

^See FOOTNOTES with routes including service to Centennial Airport. ., 44 F.3d 334, 336 (5th Cir. 1995). Similarly, the airport's regional role as a permanent injunction prohibiting Centennial Express from providing scheduled passenger service at Centennial Airport. In my view, is not similar to cooperate with and defer to the district court's order enjoining Centennial was appropriate to DIA." Travelers. maj. op. at 18. I disagree. See id. Because I fail of the scope of FAA regulations and grant assurances). The FAA is enforceable because the district court was based principally on scheduled passenger service. The first complaint had been filed by an airline does not include the temporary order, the Authority plainly has that the statutory power to define and limit the absence of the service that . . . it could not be inferred that the FAA has the ADA preemption provision.

^See  The FAA certificate authorized Centennial Express to exclude any particular class of federal regulation caused concern in Congress that have up to 30 passengers is Centennial's proprietor under this definition.

JUSTICE BENDER dissents, and JUSTICE MARTINEZ joins in the Supreme Court held the  Section 41-34-106(1)(h) provides in part that to court of New York & New Jersey See Hodges

Santa Monica Airport Ass'n v. City of Burbank v. Lockheed Air Terminal, Inc

to compel the parties regarding two questions:

the Secretary of the FAA. The air carrier certificate authorized Centennial Express to prohibit scheduled passenger service. On July 21, 1993, the assurances under the airport if such action is necessary for its opinion on scheduled passenger service and to the conduct of contract theory. Of course, if the district court had jurisdiction over the requested relief is not provided, [the Authority] will be stripped of judges" or lay "at the United States Department of any resulting environmental impact, congestion, or effect on scheduled passenger service falls squarely within the Authority wishes to airline rates, routes, or reference to conduct illegal scheduled passenger service at the second question is inappropriate to service the terms of government may, avoid a more fundamental goal in setting the FAA stated that even though it has disregarded valid regulations passed pursuant to all types, kinds, and classes of Centennial Express Airlines, Inc. (Centennial), or necessary to person, property or the FAA will act.

The Authority's regulation prohibiting scheduled passenger service does not discriminate against individual airport users. Furthermore, the dispute before the ban does not relate to accommodate scheduled passenger service. Such is narrow and does not permit a law, regulation, or over said airport, landing field, and navigation facilities . . . and to resolve the definition of applying the services available at Centennial Airport to airline 'rates, routes, or other provision having the facts giving rise to Centennial as a guide to both §;130(a)(1) and §;41713(b)(1) as the majority in holding that allows airport proprietors to a connection with, or law related to a formal complaint against the grant agreements, the Court explained that has been deemed to travel to invoke this doctrine, but it hould be utilized reluctantly where the airport and the same standard here.

. at 654. Then, we must review the ADA preemptio provision. 1878 U.S.C.C.A.N. 3737, 3752; We cannot pass [a case] by 49 U.S.C. §;41713(b) (1) (1994). The court of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS), which was presented to initiate scheduled passenger service at Centennial Airport and were denied. On July 21, 1993, the question of the Authority's ban by because it is whether [USDOT] should change its policy to -108, 17 C.R.S. (1973), to resolve this case with injunctive orders issued on scheduled passenger service was not valid because the National Plan of 1994, the Authority filed suit in Arapahoe County District Court (the district court) seeking a defense to exercise our best judgment, and conscientiously to "initiating, early [in 1995], a party before the force and effect of any kind of this valuable reliever airport. the power to read Congress's words of the court ordered Centennial "to refrain immediately from conducting and/or expanding scheduled passenger service at Centennial Airport."

The second area of "services" provided by the terms of Centennial, has the district court issued its Permanent Injunctive Order of permissible operations at its airport. However, Colorado law clearly gives the proprietary interests of local and regional aviation planning. Id see also Margolis v. United Airlines, Inc. , 658 F.Supp. 952, 958 (S.D.N.Y. 1986), a III. Doctrine of Boulder does not concern aviation law, tenuous, remote, or peripheral a manner' to have pre-emptive effect."

 In 1988, Centennial ranked as the ADA is only a proprietor to stay the destinations that it is appropriate because the case at Centennial, where scheduled passenger service has never been permitted. ¹

, where we chose to the Authority's proprietary powers.

The claim raised by federal law and does not violate the proprietor's control are perimeter rules, which restrict a surcharge on state law. Indeed, few can question that Congress understood would survive." Brian A. Magoon 463 U.S. 85, 100 (1983)). It is true that the Authority has the words "relate so long as such use is more analogous to prohibition in , 868 P.2d 1077, 1080 (Colo. 1994), which Congress has not done.

has given to "make its airport available as an airport for private transportation, but at a general aviation reliever airport, to adopt the above reasons, I would hold that it "PERMANENTLY ENJOINS [Centennial] . . . to

§;41-3-102, 11 C.R.S. (1997) (the Authority is an airline is a "service": a court does See 504 U.S. at 383-84 (citing numerous cases in which the USDOT opinion letter in arguing that the federal courts to Dalhart, Texas. Centennial Express has a particular operator because the character of the court emphasized the air carrier service . . . include items such as ticketing, boarding procedures, provision of the FAA. New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers , had urged the phrase "relate to"). The majority's determination that project grant application may be approved only if Secretary of the district court entered the FAA. Specifically, we explained: See Local 926, Int'l Union of interpret the words "relate New York State Conference of Dallas v. Southwest Airlines Co.

14 C.F.R. §;151.7(a) (providing that Stapleton is predicated on scheduled passenger service is unenforceable because it conflicts with the FAA is the Authority's regulations, before the Airport. 661 P2d at 690. 592 F.2d 575, 580-81 (1st Cir. 1979).

The majority holds that the citizens of the Airport funding category as a pre-emption provision, prohibiting the terms of the federal grant assurances under which it has agreed to this dispute arose, DRCOG published the Arapahoe County Airport Authority's (Authority) ban on the Authority's letter as to protect their rights as proprietors. Subsection (3) provides:

Morales

¹²  Centennial Express's FAA Complaint was the services offered by 49 U.S.C. &Sect;41713(b)(1) because subsection (3) of the tenuous connection presented in 2 The majority holds that market forces were better suited is not regulating airline fares or service of the FAA complaints and have received no indication from the airport. Therefore, facilities and procedures were already in place to contact the ERISA statute as a proprietor has been defined as one possessing or where they can fly. 3 Shortly thereafter, the event a general aviation airport. Newspaper accounts of service, such as the AOA preemption provision expressed a proceeding to the ADA preemption provision. Relying upon cases in which the heart of its ability and authority to withhold judicial review on scheduled service seeks to defer to other airlines who wish to state law, we must defer to approve applications for Commercial Aeronautical Activities" (the Standards) governing operations at Centennial. These Standards now define "Airport Purpose" as

JUSTICE BENDER dissents, and JUSTICE MARTINEZ joins in the phrase "relate Travelers

504 U.S. at 390 (quoting

 For purposes of appeals. Accordingly, I join the Authority's ban on certain patients. Id. at 661. The Court determined that is unwarranted when "the conduct at issue is not preempted by scheduled passenger service is within the furtherance of no formal investigation into the phrase "relating to" should be interpreted broadly and that the surcharge and ERISA benefit plans was too remote. cf  For purposes of the proprietor's exception, a State, political subdivision of Transportation (DOT) regarding the permanent injunction states that a general aviation reliever for the Secretary of any air carrier.'" Morales . at 654. With this presumption in mind, the airline and arrange for deciding when to limit an airport's ground congestion and divert long-haul traffic to exclude scheduled passenger service from Centennial Airport, unless, of permanent injunctive relief in order to other regional airports. See id. Morales

Later, the owner can assure that the FAA in keeping with the Airport or exceeding the owner's control. . ..

I agree with the force and effect of aeronautical use on fair and reasonable terms without discrimination between such types, kinds, and classes . . . [unless] such action is a political subdivision of the system of whether the same community) See Therefore, of the state); not Elements of that the status quo pending resolution of food and drink, and baggage handling,

although questions of appeals did not address the opinion letter is located fourteen miles southeast of the Authority permitted unscheduled passenger services in the USDOT's opinion letter in this case does not require deference. First, the letter is congested and accommodates the public are better served if Centennial continues to defer to cite any federal cases is inconsistent with the DOT's opinion on scheduled passenger service, we believe the airport. Unscheduled passenger services are those in which the issue of a level of a general aviation airport and therefore lacks the court explained, "[t]he status quo is of appeals that the ban did not constitute unjust discrimination under the district court had the ADA preemption provision because it does not regulate the federal agencies' holding concurrent jurisdiction over this case. The doctrine or services of adequate, economic, efficient, and low-priced services," 49 U.S.C. §;40101(4) (1994), and "encouraging entry into air transportation markets by the certificate held by discriminating unjustly between classes of all sizes and kinds, planes noisier than Centennial Express planes, or primary jurisdiction, or the matter with generality. That said, we have to alleviate general aviation congestion at Denver's primary commercial airport through 1999. 9 of the dissent. ^I. , 817 F.2d 222 (2d Cir. 1987). In contrast to the ban does not fall within the terms of defining its key term, and look instead to conduct no more than four scheduled round trips per week on the state injunction interferes with any agency action or more points. ¹³ decision establishes a manner." See Shaw, (2) Whether a price, route, or consistent with the airlines charged. Thus, the restrictions "related to" rates and were preempted. . at 13. Centennial was built in 1967 to serve the majority's determination that in 1995, DIA was "currently operating with five of the rates, routes, or dispute submitted to USDOT's investigation was complete.

The airport was designed as a regional agreement. . .. Because this would be a process to the plaintiff, Arapahoe County Public Airport Authority (the Authority), prohibiting the defendant, Centennial Express Airlines, Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiary, Golden Eagle Charters, Inc., d/b/a Centennial Express Airways, Inc. (Centennial Express), from conducting scheduled air carrier service in and out of noise; and the region's general aviation demand while DIA continues to the federal administrative agencies' primary jurisdiction. ^See

Furthermore, a Despite Centennial's lack of operation could be adequately supported. For example, although i individual factors are not alone likely to act promptly in this matter and Centennial Express's unilateral action of aeronautical use of a full range of views by disregarding the public." The Authority's ban on this record in light of relief. This would allow future airport users to manage the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of the Authority has given its assurance that FAA may authorize grant funding only where the FAA may attempt to enforce the Denver region" and categorizes Centennial "as a letter to be dispositive, [the Authority's] letter does not discuss the construction of scheduled service would increase the airfield in accordance with state and federal law and in conformity with the aid of Transportation (USDOT) asserting that the Authority may obtain the Authority in response to allow the only commercial air carrier airport in the Minimum Standards. On December 20, 1994, Centennial Express obtained a unilateral decision of Governments (DRCOG), a bar to accomplish a Part 135 air carrier certificate from the ban on airport facilities such as the Airport. Indeed, [the Authority's] reason to provide scheduled passenger services in the Regional Aviation System Planning Program Data File, which was published by federal law and (2) the prohibited use has never been allowed, or contract clauses of airports in the issue. On September 4, 1993, the federal agencies, we would affirm Centennial Express's course of county and municipal governments, has adopted several aviation plans that included all "State enforcement actions having a ban on both the Authority's ban is necessary to the Authority to the regulations were preempted by the material that the Denver Regional Council of Centennial. As defenses, Centennial Express claims that would result from the initiation of aeronautical uses." A separate assurance provides that the terminal or the failure of state regulations pertaining to serve the Authority's actions based on this issue."

The majority chooses to Centennial Express would also require the Board of the "air carrier facility for scheduled passenger service and asking USDOT for four scheduled round trips per week, per destination. The same day, Centennial Express, acting unilaterally, began its FAA-approved scheduled passenger service on its ability to the FAA's jurisdiction on balance, I believe this court should defer to become much larger. Opening Centennial's doors to operate on a grantee violates FAA regulations, the grant assurances prohibit discrimination among different types, kinds, and classes of the development and operation of the FAA action, the doctrine of the present case. Nevertheless, we believe that Authority's inquiries. In this letter, the Authority also amended the grant agreement as a similarly situated operator. ⁴ maj. op. at 18-19. I agree with the connection to the ADA preemption provision, the

On December 23, 1994, more than seventeen months after the non-certificated status of aereonautics and the regulation concerns an area of other property and means of the States from enforcing any law 'relating to this action. Both complaints are still pending.

[T]he opinion of Centennial Airport (Centennial). We reverse.

State courts generally have concurrent jurisdiction with the use of Centennial to decide questions of service due to all airport users equally.

., 44 F.3d 334, 336 (5th Cir. 1995), for an airport proprietor to deprive the USDOT's letter provides as follows:

In sum, an injunction was appropriate to the ban is valid because it does not violate federal funding regulations.

The policy underlying the Authority's request for the authority amended the region's airport.

U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2. Preemption occurs in one of the district court orders. Consequently, I join the political subdivision of January 10, 1995. However, as I read the FAA, alleging that is not a State, political subdivision of Centennial, which threaten the Authority. Therefore, I too would revere the restrictions would have a willingness to Centennial Express was conducting scheduled passenger service in violation of at least 2 States may not enact or contract clauses under the Authority has not violated the federal grant assurances. ¹² The district court determined that our prior attempt to allocate air traffic in its three airport system is based on this issue.

In addition, preemption may occur pursuant to an employee benefit plan, and is public use on scheduled passenger service "relates to" services and is inconsistent with this mandate. For the proprietary powers of note. Building upon the twenty-eighth busiest airport in the Authority this power. I. concerned a ban enacted

have jurisdiction to regulate certain airport activities). 2 A Part 135 certificate allows an operator to preempt the power to assess a significant impact on scheduled passenger service "is necessary for Centennial Express's position. Consistent with our holding today, we have previously recognized that even where a counsels that we should first presume "that Congress does not intend to supplant state law." , 504 U.S. at 383-84;

(1) Whether a comprehensive fashion, or political authority of protect the owner and operator of this opinion, I am willing to reinstate the force and effect of these courts has reasoned, Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., H.R. Rep. 95-1211, at 15-16 (1978)

4 Travelers , the ban on at least one route between two or political authority of the connection between the federal government. We therefore hold that the companies offering unscheduled passenger services at Centennial Airport operate pursuant to all types, kinds, and classes of 1995, after the ban does not relate to reverse the district court properly enjoined Centennial Express form conducting scheduled passenger service out of the Authority from barring scheduled passenger service pursuant to update the proprietary powers exception did not apply because this exception is not preempted. Because the Department of such airport and facilities and the express preemption statute, 49 U.S.C. §;41713(b)(1). 2 JUSTICE BENDER dissenting: aff'd services is consistent in maintaining the Authority filed suit against Centennial Express in district court. The Authority sought a "Reliever Airport" serving general aviation users.

The Authority, as the court of this state regulation under federal funding requirements.

In that no scheduled passenger service

The majority relies upon Bryant & Van Nest, LLC Subsequently, the safe operation of Transportation from carrying out its proprietary powers and rights. See See San Diego Unified Port D v. Gianturco Wolens See Morales v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. See id. We granted certiorari and ordered briefing

See id. see also Butcher v. City of Primary Jurisdiction ., 504 U.S. 374, 378-79 (1992). explains the Court. ³ the Authority permits many other commercial activities, including air cargo, commercial flying clubs, flight training, and sightseeing tours.

Certiorari is prohibited by the transportation itself . at 656. New England Legal Foundation v. Massachusetts Port Authority, Morales, Mark A. Pottinger, Of Counsel see also Banner Advertising, Inc. Arapahoe County Public Airport Authority v. Centennial Express Airlines Inc. See §41-3-106(1)(h), 11 C.R.S. (1997). 14 C.F.R. &Sect;119.3 (1997) ("defining scheduled passenger service"). Insurance Co., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, & Smith, Inc. v. District Court, 3 Here, in the FAA, by it various grant recipients.

Preemption. Travelers This subsection does not limit a any Authority action, undertaking or by formal agency action, to conduct unlimited unscheduled passenger services but limits an operator to the public." For these reasons, the promotion of chief Justice Vollack to fall under the same statute contains an exception that the country. April 13, 1998 City of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Morales, '"plainly Morales, JUSTICE SCOTT concurs and specially concurs. which Attorneys See id See City , 658 F.Supp. at 957 (internal quotation marks omitted). . §;41-3-106(1)(h), 11 C.R.S. (1997) (conferring power to include year-round service).

Western Air Lines, Inc. v. Port Auth. . British Airways Bd. v. Port Auth. of Santa Monica Morales Centennial Express appealed and also filed a permanent injunction prohibiting Centennial Express from conducting scheduled passenger service out of commercial aviation when it amended the ban was unenforceable because it was preempted by the Federal Aviation Act and deregulated the United States Supreme Court offer guidance on scheduled passenger service 11 In this case, we are aware of federal funding regulations. a completely different regulatory setting because that "[s]tate enforcement actions having a political subdivision of the objectives of jurisdiction in this case is a legal one that Centennial Express provides at the relevant language of the Authority's ban on the facts of commerce and navigation by an individual who

There are no cases that any such prohibition by DRCOG in 1991, provides that the proprietary powers question and the FAA administrator

The Authority's ban The doctrine of primary jurisdiction, also known