context: With the increased prominence of jet airplanes, noise and vibrations have replaced physical encumbrance as the primary complaint of claimants seeking compensation.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 161 F.Supp. 597, 600
citation_a.parenthetical: noting that prior to the introduction of jet airplanes, propeller-driven airplanes operating at the same altitudes were not such a nuisance
citation_a.sentence: See Branning, 654 F.2d at 101 (noting that “[t]he real source of interference with plaintiffs’ use of their property in Lacey was not the altitude of the flights, but the noise”); see also Highland Park, Inc. v. United States, 142 Ct.Cl. 269, 161 F.Supp. 597, 600 (1958) (noting that prior to the introduction of jet airplanes, propeller-driven airplanes operating at the same altitudes were not such a nuisance). With sufficiently egregious factual showings, our predecessor court ordered compensation for the effects produced by jet aircraft, despite the claimant’s inability to allege any flights under 500 feet.
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 654 F.2d 101, 101
citation_b.parenthetical: noting that "[t]he real source of interference with plaintiffs' use of their property in Lacey was not the altitude of the flights, but the noise"
citation_b.sentence: See Branning, 654 F.2d at 101 (noting that “[t]he real source of interference with plaintiffs’ use of their property in Lacey was not the altitude of the flights, but the noise”); see also Highland Park, Inc. v. United States, 142 Ct.Cl. 269, 161 F.Supp. 597, 600 (1958) (noting that prior to the introduction of jet airplanes, propeller-driven airplanes operating at the same altitudes were not such a nuisance). With sufficiently egregious factual showings, our predecessor court ordered compensation for the effects produced by jet aircraft, despite the claimant’s inability to allege any flights under 500 feet.