14 C.F.R. § 298.1

Applicability of part

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

This part establishes classifications of air carriers known as “air taxi operators” and “commuter air carriers,” provides certain exemptions to them from some of the economic regulatory provisions of Subtitle VII of Title 49 of the United States Code (Transportation), specifies procedures by which such air carriers may obtain authority to conduct operations, and establishes rules applicable to their operations in interstate and/or foreign air transportation in all States, Territories and possessions of the United States. This part also establishes reporting requirements for commuter air carriers and small certificated air carriers.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1974–2019 · leading case: Air Evac EMS, Inc. v. Ted Cheatham, 910 F.3d 751 (4th Cir. 2018).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Air Evac EMS, Inc. v. Ted Cheatham, 910 F.3d 751 (4th Cir. 2018). · cites it 2× “See 14 C.F.R. § 298.1 . Air ambulance services unfortunately do not come cheap.”

Scarlett v. Air Methods Corp., 922 F.3d 1053 (10th Cir. 2019). “§ 41101 and 14 C.F.R. § 298.1 . Therefore, Defendants "may provide" interstate flights.”

Air Evac EMS, Inc. v. Sullivan, 331 F. Supp. 3d 650 (W.D. Tex. 2018). “" 14 C.F.R. § 298.1 . Air ambulance providers, as air taxi operators, "directly engage in the air transportation of persons" but "[d]o not hold a certificate of public convenience and necessity and do not engage in scheduled passenger operations.”

C & R Connair, Inc. v. City of Hartford, 352 A.2d 298 (Conn. 1974). “14 C.F.R. § 298.1 . Section 298.3 (a) (2) of those regulations makes it clear that air taxi operators “[d]o not hold a certificate of public convenience and necessity or other economic authority issued by the Board.”

Forum Ins. v. Seitz Aviation, Inc., 737 P.2d 29 (Kan. 1987). “5,348 (1970), all codified at 14 C.F.R. § 298.1 et seq. (1986). Numerous amendments have occurred.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.