## Facts

- Multiple airlines serving New York International Airport (Idlewild), the Port of New York Authority, and pilot representatives challenged a Village of Cedarhurst ordinance regulating overflights near the airport.
- Aircraft approaching or departing Idlewild under federally prescribed procedures regularly flew over Cedarhurst at altitudes below 1,000 feet.
- Cedarhurst enacted an ordinance prohibiting aircraft from flying over the village below 1,000 feet above the surface, with limited exceptions (e.g., emergencies).
- The ordinance conflicted with federal approach and departure patterns and altitudes established for safe takeoff and landing at Idlewild.
- Plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment and an injunction barring enforcement; federal aviation authorities intervened supporting federal control of air navigation.
- Homeowner counterclaims alleging nuisance/trespass were withdrawn, and the court limited the case to the ordinance’s validity rather than private property-right claims.

## Issues

1. Whether federal aviation statutes and regulations preempt a municipal ordinance setting minimum flight altitudes over the municipality.
2. Whether airspace below 1,000 feet, when necessary for safe takeoff and landing under federal procedures, is “navigable airspace” subject to exclusive federal regulation.
3. Whether the ordinance can be justified as a local police-power measure despite conflict with federal regulation of air navigation.

## Decision

- The court declared the Cedarhurst ordinance unconstitutional and void.
- The court held that Congress, through comprehensive federal aviation regulation, occupied the field of regulating navigable airspace, including airspace needed for takeoff and landing.
- The court found a direct conflict because the ordinance prohibited flight operations required by federal procedures for Idlewild.
- The court granted declaratory and injunctive relief, enjoining the village and its officers from enforcing the ordinance against the plaintiffs.

## Legal Principles

- Regulation of navigable airspace and flight operations affecting interstate and foreign air transportation is a matter of national concern committed to federal authority.
- Navigable airspace includes airspace necessary to ensure safety in aircraft takeoff and landing, even when those operations require low-altitude flight over nearby communities.
- A local ordinance that sets flight altitudes or routes in a way that conflicts with federal regulations is invalid under the Supremacy Clause.
- Municipal police power cannot be used to impose flight restrictions that frustrate a uniform federal system of air navigation; complaints about routes/altitudes must be directed through federal administrative mechanisms.
- A preemption ruling on a flight-restriction ordinance does not, by itself, resolve separate claims about nuisance, trespass, or compensation by individual property owners.

## Conclusion

The court invalidated Cedarhurst’s minimum-altitude ordinance because federal law and federal flight procedures exclusively govern navigable airspace used for safe takeoff and landing, and local restrictions that conflict with that system are preempted and unenforceable.


Allegheny Airlines, Inc. v. Vill. of Cedarhurst, 132 F. Supp. 871 (E.D.N.Y. 1955)