Surrender Certificate

[dhc8fo]

Who says you can't argue with your instructor just because he is a judge? Who cares if he is a judge. He is your instructor first, in this circumstance, and school is where you are supposed to expand your knowledge base through discourse. That is what you are paying him for. I think you should call him on it!


Also, I had a few Feds on my jumpseat when flying 121, and a few ramp checks as well... I always asked for their credientials while they were looking at mine. I never had a problem. Seems silly to think they would walk off with your goods as a surrender when they have just asked to see them. I am sure that wouldn't hold much water.

What school is this anyway????

 

[JAFI]

Who says you can't argue with your instructor just because he is a judge? Who cares if he is a judge. He is your instructor first, in this circumstance, and school is where you are supposed to expand your knowledge base through discourse. That is what you are paying him for. I think you should call him on it!

I agree that school is to expand knowledge; however you can ask an instructor (or a Judge) to provide a reference or an explanation but not "call him on it". IMHO getting into a pissing contest with a College Instructor or a Judge (sitting or otherwise) will not work in your favor most of the time. Professional courtesy is normally called for and proper. If you wish: "You can get more bees with honey than vinegar..."


I tried to get a reference for you from the Cornell Law web site, but it seems to be down. So I'll be quoting with out reference for now (I really hate doing so). In the case of a representative of Law Enforcement or from the FAA Administrator under the US Code, Code of Federal Regulations 44701 or 44702 (again I will have to find the correct reference) can examine your Airman certificate upon request. Examine means handle, touch, copy, etc. but it will be returned to you. The code also says that the certificate is yours until it is surrendered or revoked. There is a specific process for both surrender and revocation.



Bobby, I do enjoy academic discussions. I think it benefits all involved. You can always learn something sometimes when you least expect it.




JAFI

EDIT --- I was wrong, the reference is in Part 61 not 44701 0r 44702:

61.3 Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.



(l) Inspection of certificate. Each person who holds an airman certificate, medical certificate, authorization, or license required by this part must present it and their photo identification as described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section for inspection upon a request from:

(1) The Administrator;

(2) An authorized representative of the National Transportation Safety Board;

(3) Any Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer; or

(4) An authorized representative of the Transportation Security Administration.

------------------------------------------

So many regulations, Too little time......

 

[midlifeflyer]

In addition, Avweb has put out an excellent series on FAA certificate actions, which is worth reading.

It is. I especially like the practical advice about how to interview a lawyer and the "duct tape" defense.

Come to think of it, those two items tell us how Aviation Law is =not= very different from other areas.

 

[Jedi_Cheese]

Being a pilot with a law degree means little for teaching this course. I know at least two pilots who have law degrees; perhaps one would be somewhat qualfied to teach aviation law on the college level. Your instructor probably would be great teaching torts, civil procedure, litigation, etc. Aviation law is much different than those areas.

It's better than what we had set up before the the judge became a professor. They had one of the non-lawyer professors teaching the class. It is hard to draw an aviation specialty professor to teach a one night a week class (we do ship some specialty people in, but mostly those people went through our program and want to give back).

 

[lawfly]

Good comments collectively on the NASA reports. If the FAA is aware of the filing (e.g., airman tells FAA before retaining counsel) the FAA complaint on its face might even concede the NASA filing, but the action could still proceed, even with a penalty waiver, and, if the FAA was successful, there would still be a violation history. Still better to file. As noted by other posters, there are some exceptions to NASA penalty waiver, but it is quite inclusive. Good comments re: ID strip (even if there have been changes/rulings on this): no description which in any way incriminates. The relevance of the strip in the enforcement action is to prove the timely filing and that the filing is for the incident(s) alleged (date and time of incident shows that, without need for incriminating title/description).
As for the Ramp Check question, the plain language of the FAR is persuasive. There are underlying due process considerations, as well. The closest thing which comes to mind is the "emergency" enforcement action, which arguably still provides for a modicum of due process. Simply walking up to an airman on a ramp, as part of a "ramp check", and physically yanking or taking possession (versus "inspection") of his ticket (and equating that with "surrender", in your description) violates even minimal due process, by comparison. And "surrender" is specifically spoken to in the FARs.
As this is at least nominally an Aviation Law class, suggest you consult FARs (one has been posted) and you might want to look at the emergency enforcement process, and the NASA reporting program. The reporting form, if you don't have one, is available at the AOPA and, I think, FAA websites. This is not really a matter of "credibility"; that has more to do with testimony.
I disagree that "Aviation Law" is separate from tort, civil procedure, evidence, litigation, administrative law, etc. Actually, some of the most cited appellate opinions in substantive tort law and in evidence are aviation cases. That was certainly true in the 80s and 90s. Other cases have come along since then but still some widely cited aviation cases, especially federal. But, yes, it is different in that it is a "specialized" mix of those areas. (In fact, due process, which I mentioned earlier, is a constitutional concept.) There are "aviation lawyers" who have litigated aviation tort cases but have never handled an enforcement action, and the other way around. There are "aviation attorneys" who are non-pilots. (I personally think advanced pilot/flight instructor credentials are an enhancement.) Sorry to be rambling here. The other posts were informative. Just thought I'd throw in my 2 cents.

 

[Cutlass1287]

So what happens if a pilot screws something up, but no one says anything, until he sends in the NASA report, and gets violated. Is it possible that no one even knew until he sent in the report?

 

[A Squared]

So what happens if a pilot screws something up, but no one says anything, until he sends in the NASA report, and gets violated. Is it possible that no one even knew until he sent in the report?

THe FAA is not supposed to do this, see 91.25. However, what is to prevent a fed from getting information through the ASRS which tells him where to look to start digging for information on a violation? Nothing, except of course the regulation. Unless you believe that the faa would never violate thier own regulations, you realize that there is at least some possiblity of ASRS info being used through the backdoor.

91.25 The Administrator of the FAA will not use reports submitted to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration under the Aviation Safety Reporting Program (or information derived therefrom) in any enforcement action, except information concerning accidents or criminal offenses which are wholly excluded from the program.

 

[CapnVegetto]

I've always understood that you are in no way shape or form EVER required to hand your certificate to a fed unless he presents you with a written emergency order of revocation.

 

[mnixon]

In my aviation law class, I feel that my prof made two mistakes (I think, if not it's my mistunderstanding). The major problem is that I am an undergrad and he is a local judge, so if it comes down to credibility on who to believe, I'm going to lose. So, I need some help finding a goverment publication (of some sort, can include court cases - actually perfered) that spells out the regulations on these two issues.

The first is that he said that you shouldn't physically give your pilot's certificate to the FAA inspector during a ramp check because it may be thought of as surrendering your certificate. I believe this claim to be false A quick search on these boards showed that I am in the right but I need proof of it somehow.

The second is that an ASRS form can't be used in an enforcement action against you and you get off the hook. I believe that an ASRS form's title can be used against you and that using the form only waives any action the FAA can take against you, you will still have it on your record.

You don't want to work for the FAA do you? That could change my answer.

 

[JAFI]

I've always understood that you are in no way shape or form EVER required to hand your certificate to a fed unless he presents you with a written emergency order of revocation.

Read:

61.3 Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations.

(l) Inspection of certificate. Each person who holds an airman certificate, medical certificate, authorization, or license required by this part must present it and their photo identification as described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section for inspection upon a request from:

(1) The Administrator;

(2) An authorized representative of the National Transportation Safety Board;

(3) Any Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer; or

(4) An authorized representative of the Transportation Security Administration.


--- Or, You could do it your way and maybe you'll get to see that letter of Revocation.....
JAFI

 

[CapnVegetto]

There you go....it says you have to PRESENT it. I've seen Vanna White present plenty of stuff on Wheel of Fortune without ever handing it to anyone. Here you go sir, look at it all you want, as long as it stays in my hand.

 

[JAFI]

There you go....it says you have to PRESENT it. I've seen Vanna White present plenty of stuff on Wheel of Fortune without ever handing it to anyone. Here you go sir, look at it all you want, as long as it stays in my hand.

Well, there you go.... The Vanna White defense. Please let us know if and when you are going to use this in court. I would pay to see that.
JAFI

 

[CapnVegetto]

OK, JAFI, this is from Webster's online dictionary:

Main Entry: pre·sent
Pronunciation: pri-'zent
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French presenter, from Latin praesentare, from praesent-, praesens, adjective
transitive senses
1 a (1) : to bring or introduce into the presence of someone especially of superior rank or status (2) : to introduce socially b : to bring (as a play) before the public
2 : to make a gift to
3 a : to lay (as a charge) before a court as an object of inquiry b : to bring a formal public charge, indictment, or presentment against
4 : to nominate to a benefice
5 a : to offer to view : SHOW b : to bring to one's attention <this presents a problem>
6 : to act the part of : PERFORM
7 : to aim, point, or direct (as a weapon) so as to face something or in a particular direction
intransitive senses
1 : to present a weapon
2 : to become manifest
3 : to come forward as a patient
4 : to make a presentation
- pre·sent·er noun

Where in there does it say that to present it, I have to PHYSICALLY HAND it to him? Nowhere. I especially like definition #5. To offer to view. "Here you go sir....I'll hold it, and you can view it all you want. Here, let me show you the back....and the sides....."

 

[JAFI]

Well then, your mind is make up.

Good Luck

JAFI

 

[Xav8tor]

The little card you carry in your wallet is merely proof that you have the right to do what an ATP does. The loss of the card itself, whether inadvertent or stolen (or somewhere between) does not mean you are no longer an ATP. There is even a procedure you can follow so that you won't miss that next trip when you realize you can't find your license. In order for you to lose the rights to exercise the privileges of your ATP will take far more than merely allowing an AUHTORIZED official to hold your cert. The attorney who wrote the AvWeb article(s) and JAFI on this board give excellent advice. Heed it. Lawfly's 2 cent opinion was worth a bit more than the price he quoted too!