State Court Decision Affecting Recordation of Artisan Liens, 53707 [05-17835]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 174 / Friday, September 9, 2005 / Notices
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among the Exchange’s
members. The Commission believes that
the proposal should allow the Exchange
to more accurately charge LMMs the
Exchange’s true costs when multiple
options issues are transferred. Further,
the Commission believes that by making
the proposal retroactive to January 1,
2002, the Exchange could make
adjustments to past transfers in
accordance with the original intent of
the fee.
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,8 that the
proposed rule change (SR–PCX–2005–
68) and Amendment No. 1 are
approved.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated
authority.9
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5–4928 Filed 9–8–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
State Court Decision Affecting
Recordation of Artisan Liens
Federal Aviation
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Consistent with Agency
policy, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) gives notice of
the holding in Creation Aviation, Inc.,
vs. Textron Financial Corporation,
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth
District, No. 4D04–2178, decided on
April 27, 2005. The Court in Creston
held that Federal law pertaining to
recording with the FAA Aircraft
Registry did not preempt a Florida
statute requiring that an artisan lien for
work on an aircraft first be filed in the
county where the work was performed
in order to enforce the lien under
Florida law. Accordingly, the FAA is
advising the public that recording an
artisan lien with the FAA Aircraft
Registry only, may be insufficient to
enforce an artisan lien under Florida
law.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph R. Standell, Aeronautical Center
Counsel, Monroney Aeronautical Center
(AMC–7), Federal Aviation
Administration, 6500 S. MacArthur,
Oklahoma City, OK 73169; Telephone
(405) 954–3296.
8 15
9 17
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:19 Sep 08, 2005
Jkt 205001
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under 49 U.S.C. 44107, the FAA
maintains an aircraft registry that
records ‘‘conveyances that affect an
interest in civil aircraft of the United
States.’’
The FAA published notice in the
Federal Register that the FAA Aircraft
Registry would record artisan liens on
aircraft that met the minimum
requirements of state statute. The notice
stated that, for aircraft, ‘‘there is Federal
preemption of place of filing: The FAA
Aircraft Registry at Oklahoma City.’’ 46
FR 61528, December 17, 1981. The sole
purpose of that notice was to set out the
criteria for recording artisan liens with
the FAA Aircraft Registry.
Florida Statues, F.S.A. 329.01,
requires all liens of affecting civil
aircraft to be filed with the Federal
Aviation Administration. F.S.A. 329.51
provides that aircraft liens are
enforceable provided the lienor records
a verified lien notice with the clerk of
the circuit court in the county where the
aircraft was located when services were
furnished.
In Creston, a fixed base operator
attempted to foreclose a mechanic’s lien
that had been filed and recorded with
the FAA consistent with 49 U.S.C.
44107 and F.S.A. 329.01. However, the
Florida Court of Appeal held that the
fixed base operator’s failure to file a
notice of lien in the county where the
work was performed rendered the lien
unenforceable under state law.
The Florida Court of Appeal did not
accept the fixed base operator’s
argument that state or local filing
requirements contained in F.S.A. 329.51
were preempted by Federal law. The
Court in Creston cited Holiday Airlines
Corporation v. Pacific Propeller, Inc.,
620 F.2d 731 (1980), which had similar
facts. The Court in Holiday held that a
lien filed with the FAA was enforceable,
notwithstanding a lienor’s failure to file
in the State of Washington. The Court
held that the ‘‘federal recording statute,
and rules implementing it, clearly
preempt the filing requirements of
Washington law.’’ On the other hand,
the Court in Holiday held that ‘‘matters
touching on the validity of liens are
determined by underlying State law.’’
The Florida Court of Appeal accepted
the argument that until a lien on a civil
aircraft is recorded with the FAA
Aircraft Registry, it is valid only against
those persons with actual notice and
their heirs and devises and that after the
lien is filed with the FAA, it is valid
against all persons. However, the Court
determined that the State of Florida is
not precluded from imposing
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
53707
requirements, including local filing
requirements that affect the
enforceability of aircraft liens in Florida.
Interested parties may wish to
research state lien statutes to determine
if local requirements affect
enforceability of artisan liens recorded
with the FAA.
Issued in Oklahoma City on September 1,
2005.
Joseph R. Standell,
Aeronautical Center Counsel.
[FR Doc. 05–17835 Filed 9–8–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Summary Notice No. PE–2005–53]
Petitions for Exemption; Summary of
Petitions Received
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of petitions for
exemption received.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Pursuant to FAA’s rulemaking
provisions governing the application,
processing, and disposition of petitions
for exemption part 11 of Title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), this
notice contains a summary of certain
petitions seeking relief from specified
requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of
this notice is to improve the public’s
awareness of, and participation in, this
aspect of FAA’s regulatory activities.
Neither publication of this notice nor
the inclusion or omission of information
in the summary is intended to affect the
legal status of any petition or its final
disposition.
DATES: Comments on petitions received
must identify the petition docket
number involved and must be received
on or before September 29, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
[identified by DOT DMS Docket Number
FAA–2005–22172 and FAA–2005–
21814] by any of the following methods:
• Web Site: https://dms.dot.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments on the DOT electronic docket
site.
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–
001.
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal
Holidays.
E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM
09SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 174 (Friday, September 9, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 53707]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17835]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
State Court Decision Affecting Recordation of Artisan Liens
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Consistent with Agency policy, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) gives notice of the holding in Creation Aviation,
Inc., vs. Textron Financial Corporation, Florida District Court of
Appeal, Fourth District, No. 4D04-2178, decided on April 27, 2005. The
Court in Creston held that Federal law pertaining to recording with the
FAA Aircraft Registry did not preempt a Florida statute requiring that
an artisan lien for work on an aircraft first be filed in the county
where the work was performed in order to enforce the lien under Florida
law. Accordingly, the FAA is advising the public that recording an
artisan lien with the FAA Aircraft Registry only, may be insufficient
to enforce an artisan lien under Florida law.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph R. Standell, Aeronautical
Center Counsel, Monroney Aeronautical Center (AMC-7), Federal Aviation
Administration, 6500 S. MacArthur, Oklahoma City, OK 73169; Telephone
(405) 954-3296.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under 49 U.S.C. 44107, the FAA maintains an aircraft registry that
records ``conveyances that affect an interest in civil aircraft of the
United States.''
The FAA published notice in the Federal Register that the FAA
Aircraft Registry would record artisan liens on aircraft that met the
minimum requirements of state statute. The notice stated that, for
aircraft, ``there is Federal preemption of place of filing: The FAA
Aircraft Registry at Oklahoma City.'' 46 FR 61528, December 17, 1981.
The sole purpose of that notice was to set out the criteria for
recording artisan liens with the FAA Aircraft Registry.
Florida Statues, F.S.A. 329.01, requires all liens of affecting
civil aircraft to be filed with the Federal Aviation Administration.
F.S.A. 329.51 provides that aircraft liens are enforceable provided the
lienor records a verified lien notice with the clerk of the circuit
court in the county where the aircraft was located when services were
furnished.
In Creston, a fixed base operator attempted to foreclose a
mechanic's lien that had been filed and recorded with the FAA
consistent with 49 U.S.C. 44107 and F.S.A. 329.01. However, the Florida
Court of Appeal held that the fixed base operator's failure to file a
notice of lien in the county where the work was performed rendered the
lien unenforceable under state law.
The Florida Court of Appeal did not accept the fixed base
operator's argument that state or local filing requirements contained
in F.S.A. 329.51 were preempted by Federal law. The Court in Creston
cited Holiday Airlines Corporation v. Pacific Propeller, Inc., 620 F.2d
731 (1980), which had similar facts. The Court in Holiday held that a
lien filed with the FAA was enforceable, notwithstanding a lienor's
failure to file in the State of Washington. The Court held that the
``federal recording statute, and rules implementing it, clearly preempt
the filing requirements of Washington law.'' On the other hand, the
Court in Holiday held that ``matters touching on the validity of liens
are determined by underlying State law.''
The Florida Court of Appeal accepted the argument that until a lien
on a civil aircraft is recorded with the FAA Aircraft Registry, it is
valid only against those persons with actual notice and their heirs and
devises and that after the lien is filed with the FAA, it is valid
against all persons. However, the Court determined that the State of
Florida is not precluded from imposing requirements, including local
filing requirements that affect the enforceability of aircraft liens in
Florida.
Interested parties may wish to research state lien statutes to
determine if local requirements affect enforceability of artisan liens
recorded with the FAA.
Issued in Oklahoma City on September 1, 2005.
Joseph R. Standell,
Aeronautical Center Counsel.
[FR Doc. 05-17835 Filed 9-8-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M