“We are pleased the FAA has issued its findings because it opens the door to discovery in the federal antitrust case...” Stuhmer wrote in an e-mail received late Thursday. “The FAA decision made clear the issues that will now be decided in the federal court.”
His comments were not received in time to be included in Friday’s story about the Part 16 ruling, which the FAA dismissed. The FAA’s director’s determination said Montrose County had not, as JetAway alleged, violated its federal grant assurances concerning economic nondiscrimination.
|
Advertisement |
JetAway also sued in district court and in a mixed ruling handed down last year, was told it could call itself an FBO, but could not sell fuel and that its land lease was terminated.
The county was told to obtain an access permit from JetAway; those discussions foundered over the application and fee the county found acceptable versus what JetAway thought was fair.
JetAway’s on-airport access has since been suspended indefinitely.
Its antitrust suit, however, is still alive. The suit, which alleges unfair restraint on competition and civil rights violations, was stayed pending the Part 16 finding. JetAway wants to add more individuals to its antitrust suit, as well as more evidence, and hopes to do so now that the FFA’s directive has been issued.
Don wrote on Jul 9, 2009 7:17 AM:
Blane wrote on Jul 4, 2009 4:28 AM: