Judge rules in favor of “Drone Slayer,” dismisses lawsuit filed by pilot
Ah, jurisdiction. When you don't have it, you ain't gettin' very far.A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought against William Merideth, the Kentucky man who shot down a drone that Merideth believed was flying over his own property in 2015. ...
...
Last year, drone pilot David Boggs sued Merideth in federal court in Louisville, asking the court to make a legal determination as to whether Boggs’ drone’s July 2015 flight constituted trespassing.
... Boggs’ lawyers believed that because Merideth’s destruction of the drone was unwarranted, therefore Merideth should pay damages of $1,500 to repair or replace the drone.
... Senior US District Judge Thomas B. Russell ruled in favor of Merideth’s motion to dismiss, finding that federal court is not the proper venue for this claim.
Boggs’ lawyers had argued, essentially, that because his drone was flying in the air, which is regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration, that this incident was relevant to federal law. However, the FAA was not a party to the suit. ... the judge didn’t buy it, indicating that state courts would be better suited to adjudicate this claim.
"But even if Boggs is correct that his unmanned aircraft is subject to federal regulation, ... the fact remains that the FAA has not sought to enforce any such regulations in this case," Judge Russell concluded. "Moreover, FAA regulations, at most, would constitute ancillary issues in this case, in which the heart of Boggs’ claim is one for damage to his unmanned aircraft under Kentucky state law."
