Goodspeed Airport LLC v. East Haddam Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Commission
634 F.3d 206
| 2d Cir. | 2011Background
- Goodspeed Airport sought declaratory and injunctive relief to permit tree removal on its Wetlands-protected property without IWWC permit.
- IWWC (East Haddam Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Commission) requires permits for activities affecting wetlands under Connecticut law (IWWA/CEPA).
- FAA Part 77 defines obstructions to air navigation; airport argued trees are obstructions and removal should be exempt from local permitting.
- Airport claimed field preemption by federal law (Aviation Act/FAA) and express preemption under ADA; district court rejected both theories.
- IWWA/CEPA are environmental statutes lacking aviation-specific language and do not prohibit removal, but impose permit requirements.
- District court upheld no field or express preemption; case proceeded on bench, resulting in judgment for defendants and appellate affirmation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether federal law occupies the field of air safety preempting state permitting | Goodspeed argues field preemption by Congress over air safety | IWWC/CEPA permit regime not intruding into air safety field | No field preemption; state regime does not intrude on air safety field |
| Whether ADA express preempts state environmental/land-use statutes | ADA preempts state/locals that affect air carriers indirectly | ADA does not preempt environmental permits with remote impact | ADA does not expressly preempt IWWA/CEPA in this context |
| Whether IWWA/CEPA effects frustrate removal of obstructions under FAA | Removing trees obstructing air navigation should be free from permit | Permitting framework applies regardless of obstruction status | Permit regime does not unlawfully prohibit removal; regulation permissible |
| Whether the district court properly applied preemption standards | Cites broad occupancy of field by federal law | Need two-step inquiry: intent and scope; here not interdicting via state law | Correct application; no preemption found |
Key Cases Cited
- Air Transport Ass'n of America, Inc. v. Cuomo, 520 F.3d 218 (2d Cir. 2008) (discusses field preemption in aviation safety context)
- Tweed-New Haven Airport Auth. v. Town of East Haven, Conn., 582 F. Supp. 2d 261 (D. Conn. 2008) (distance between preemption by aviation act and local actions; not controlling here)
- New York SMSA Ltd. P'ship v. Town of Clarkstown, 612 F.3d 97 (2d Cir. 2010) (recognizes implied preemption analysis and deference to state roles)
- Gade v. Nat'l Solid Wastes Mgmt. Ass'n, 505 U.S. 88 (U.S. 1992) (two-step preemption framework; scope matters)
- Cal. Coastal Comm'n v. Granite Rock Co., 480 U.S. 572 (U.S. 1987) (facial preemption analysis; limits on state regulation when field is preempted)
- English v. Gen. Elec. Co., 496 U.S. 72 (U.S. 1990) (concepts of purpose and effect in preemption)