## Facts

- Executive Jet Aviation’s aircraft departed Burke Lakefront Airport in Cleveland, Ohio, adjacent to Lake Erie, on a domestic charter itinerary from Cleveland to Portland, Maine, then to White Plains, New York.
- During takeoff, the aircraft struck a flock of seagulls that had been on the runway and were flushed into the plane’s flight path.
- Birds were ingested into the jet engines, causing an almost total loss of power shortly after becoming airborne.
- The aircraft crashed and sank in the navigable waters of Lake Erie a short distance from the airport.
- The operator sued the City of Cleveland and others involved in airport and air-traffic operations, alleging negligent failure to control or remove birds and negligent airport/air-traffic handling, seeking property-damage recovery.

## Issues

1. Whether federal admiralty jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1333(1) applies to an aviation tort solely because the aircraft crashed into and sank in navigable waters shortly after takeoff.
2. Whether, absent legislation, aviation tort claims fall within admiralty only when the wrong bears a significant relationship to traditional maritime activity.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court unanimously affirmed dismissal for lack of admiralty jurisdiction.
- The Court held that neither the mere presence of navigable waters at the crash site nor the fact that the aircraft was over navigable waters is sufficient to invoke admiralty jurisdiction for aviation tort claims.
- Admiralty jurisdiction over aviation torts exists only when the claim has a significant relationship to traditional maritime activity, which was absent for this domestic charter flight.

## Legal Principles

- Admiralty tort jurisdiction is not triggered in aviation cases by locality alone; a maritime-activity connection is required.
- For aviation tort claims, admiralty jurisdiction exists only when the alleged wrong has a significant relationship to traditional maritime activity.
- Extending admiralty based on the fortuity of where an aircraft happens to crash would produce arbitrary jurisdictional outcomes inconsistent with the purposes of maritime law.
- In the absence of congressional action creating a special federal maritime forum for aviation accidents, courts should not expand admiralty jurisdiction beyond traditional maritime concerns.

## Conclusion

Because the accident involved a land-based aircraft on a routine domestic charter flight and lacked a significant relationship to traditional maritime activity, the claim did not fall within federal admiralty jurisdiction even though the aircraft crashed into navigable waters.


Executive Jet Aviation, Inc. v. City of Cleveland, 409 U.S. 249 (1972)