Alva A. Aaron v. The United States. Peter Andersen v. The United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that recovery could not be had for flights above the minimum safe altitudes unless the flights amounted to a \practical destruction\ of the property
• recognizing possibility of recovery where \travel in the navigable air space [is] so severe as to amount to a practical destruction or a substantial impairment of [private property]\
• recognizing possibility of recovery where “travel in the navigable air space [is] so severe as to amount to a practical destruction or a substantial impairment of [private property]”
• allowing claims based on flights below 500 feet, while denying those based on flights over 500 feet
• allowing claims based on flights below 500 feet, while denying those based on flights over 500 feet
• declining to find a taking due to aircraft overflights where only two planes flew over the property per day but finding a physical taking when flights increased to a dozen per day

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).