holding that a city's prohibition of the operation of seaplanes on a lake was not preempted and stating that the federal government's regulation of aircraft in flight is distinguishable from the regulation of the designation of plane landing sites, which involves local control of land use
Summary of this case from Emerald Dev. Co. v. McNeillNo. 95-2050.
October 7, 1996.
C.A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 76 F. 3d 1245.
holding that a city's prohibition of the operation of seaplanes on a lake was not preempted and stating that the federal government's regulation of aircraft in flight is distinguishable from the regulation of the designation of plane landing sites, which involves local control of land use
Summary of this case from Emerald Dev. Co. v. McNeillrequiring in claims of fraudulent concealment that the plaintiff demonstrate that " defendants engaged in a course of conduct designed to conceal evidence of their alleged wrong-doing and that [the plaintiffs] were not on actual or constructive notice of that evidence, despite their exercise of reasonable diligence"
Summary of this case from Davis v. Bowman Apple Products Co. Inc.Full title:J. GEILS BAND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN ET AL. v. SMITH BARNEY SHEAESON, INC.…
Court:U.S.
Date published: Oct 7, 1996
"If the moving party demonstrates that there is an absence of evidence to support the non-moving party's…
Roma, III, Ltd. v. Bd. of Appeals of RockportFederal case law, however, has distinguished the preempted regulation of flight operations from the permitted…