14 C.F.R. § 67.403
[Reserved]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases, 1999–2013 · leading case: Cooper v. Nat'l Transp. Saf. Bd., 660 F.3d 476 (D.C. Cir. 2011).
Cooper v. Nat'l Transp. Saf. Bd., 660 F.3d 476 (D.C. Cir. 2011). “The Board ruled that Cooper’s admitted failure to read the question before answering it constituted willful disregard for truth or falsity, and he thus had intentionally made a false statement in his application, in violation of 14 C.F.R. § 67.403 (a)(1). Because the willful…”
Manin v. Nat'l Transp. Saf. Bd., 627 F.3d 1239 (D.C. Cir. 2011). “On June 20, 2008, it issued an emergency order immediately revoking his flight certificates and his first class airman medical certificate because of his “multiple falsifications” on airman medical certificate applications in violation of 14 C.F.R. § 67.403 . Manin filed an…”
Singleton v. Babbitt, 588 F.3d 1078 (D.C. Cir. 2009). “The FAA charged Singleton with violating 14 C.F.R. § 67.403 (a)(1), which bars “fraudulent or intentionally false statements] on any application for a medical certificate.”
Dillmon v. Nat'l Transp. Saf. Bd., 588 F.3d 1085 (D.C. Cir. 2009). “The order explained the Administrator had concluded Dillmon’s answers to Question 18w in 1997, 2007 and 2008 violated Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) provision 14 C.F.R. § 67.403 (a)(1), which states: “No person may make or cause to be made .”
Stephen Taylor v. Michael Huerta, 723 F.3d 210 (D.C. Cir. 2013). “” In fact, he had been arrested by the California Highway Patrol (although not convicted) for drunk driving in 2008; On September 12, 2011, the FAA notified Taylor that it had learned of his “alcohol-related motor vehicle incident” and was conducting an investigation into…”
Porco v. Huerta, 472 F. App'x 2 (D.C. Cir. 2012). “Roberta Porco, a pilot of over fifteen years, petitions for review of the Board’s Opinion and Order of July 15, 2011, reversing the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) that she had not violated 14 C.F.R. § 67.403 (a)(1), and revoking her airman and medical…”
Marie Finazzo v. Robert Sturgell, 407 F. App'x 241 (9th Cir. 2011). “Given our deferential standard of review, the Board could have reasonably determined that the overwhelming weight of the evidence established that Finazzo intentionally made a false representation of material fact with knowledge of its falsity for one or more of the items on her…”
Culliton v. Blakey, 245 F. App'x 659 (9th Cir. 2007). “See 14 C.F.R. § 67.403 . The NTSB properly rejected Culliton’s affirmative defense of laches because the FAA may revoke airman certificates any time after questions arise concerning an individual’s qualification to hold the certificates.”
Powell v. Erb, 78 F. Supp. 2d 496 (D. Maryland 1999). “See 14 C.F.R. section 67.403. There is also no question that Mr.”
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.