C.F.R. » Title 14 » CHAPTER I—FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION › SUBCHAPTER F—AIR TRAFFIC AND GENERAL OPERATING RULES › PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES › Subpart E—Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, and Alterations

14 C.F.R. § 91.405

Maintenance required

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

Each owner or operator of an aircraft—

(a) Shall have that aircraft inspected as prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this chapter;

(b) Shall ensure that maintenance personnel make appropriate entries in the aircraft maintenance records indicating the aircraft has been approved for return to service;

(c) Shall have any inoperative instrument or item of equipment, permitted to be inoperative by § 91.213(d)(2) of this part, repaired, replaced, removed, or inspected at the next required inspection; and

(d) When listed discrepancies include inoperative instruments or equipment, shall ensure that a placard has been installed as required by § 43.11 of this chapter.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1994–2025 · leading case: South Side Trust & Sav. Bank v. Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd., 927 N.E.2d 179 (Ill. App. Ct. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
South Side Trust & Sav. Bank v. Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd., 927 N.E.2d 179 (Ill. App. Ct. 2010). “” 14 C.F.R. §91.405 (a) (2006). Pursuant to sections 91.”
Jarmuth v. Aldridge, 747 N.E.2d 1014 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). “” 14 C.F.R. § 91.405 (1999). Sections 91.403 and 91.”
Cosgrove v. McDonnell Douglas Helicopter Co., 847 F. Supp. 719 (D. Minnesota 1994). · cites it 3× “By its present Motion, McDonnell Douglas contends that the 15% of fault, that the Jury *722 had attributed to Alan Backman for the period prior to January 1, 1991, should be reallocated to the Jacksons as: 1) Under 14 C.F.R. § 91.405 , the Jacksons had a non-delegable duty to…”
Gerber v. Nat'l Transp. Saf. Bd., 650 F. App'x 440 (9th Cir. 2016). “” Substantial evidence in the record supports the NTSB’s finding that Gerber knew his aircraft had three open discrepancies and that he failed to have them resolved before operating two flights on February 26, 2012.”
Jet Test & Transp. LLC v. Hallmark Ins. Co. (D. Nev. 2021). “7 Jet Test, as owner of the aircraft, was obligated under 14 CFR § 91.405 to “have that 8 aircraft inspected.”
Blue Air Training Corp. v. Hadley (D.N.M. 2025). “Although 14 C.F.R. § 91.405 places responsibility on the owner to “ensure that maintenance personnel make appropriate entries in the aircraft maintenance records,” it does not provide that a failure to do so renders the aircraft unairworthy.”
Jarmuth v. Aldridge (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). “" 14 C.F.R. § 91.405 (1999). Sections 91.403 and 91.”
South Side Trust & Sav. Bank of Peoria v. Mitsubishi Heavy Indus. (Ill. App. Ct. 2010). “” 14 C.F.R. § 91.405 (a) (2006). Pursuant to sections 91.”
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.