Federal Court Asked To Clarify Rights Of Property Owners And UAV Operators | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-10.27.25

AirborneNextGen-
10.28.25

Airborne-Unlimited-10.29.25

Airborne-Unlimited-10.30.25

AirborneUnlimited-10.17.25

Thu, Jan 07, 2016

Federal Court Asked To Clarify Rights Of Property Owners And UAV Operators

First Lawsuit Filed In Kentucky By Person Whose UAV Was Shot Down By A Homeowner

The first lawsuit regarding the rights of drone operators versus property owners has been filed in federal court.

On Monday, Kentucky resident David Boggs filed a suit in The United States District Court of Western Kentucky asking the court to “define clearly the rights of aircraft operators and property owners” as they relate to unmanned aircraft. The lawsuit stems from an incident last year that gained national media attention in which a Hillview, Kentucky resident shot down an unmanned aircraft being flown by Boggs, claiming that the drone had trespassed and invaded his privacy. 

Although the shooter initially faced criminal charges, those charges were eventually dismissed by a state court judge. On October 26, 2015, Kentucky District Court Judge Rebecca Ward dismissed the criminal charges, saying that he “had a right to shoot” at the aircraft. Boggs, on the other hand, claims that he was approximately 200 feet above the property at the time it was shot down and did not view or record the defendant's property.

“The tension between private property rights and the freedom to use the national airspace is important to both the unmanned aircraft industry and the general public,” says James Mackler, Boggs’ legal counsel who leads Frost Brown Todd’s Unmanned Aircraft Systems practice. “Property owners deserve to be free from harassment and invasion of their privacy. Likewise, aircraft operators need to know the boundaries in which they can legally operate without risk of being shot down. This lawsuit will give clarity to everyone.”

”Our client is requesting clarification of the legal issues and to be compensated for the damage to his aircraft,” says co-counsel Chip Campbell, also of Frost Brown Todd. Both Campbell and Mackler are former military aviators who advise clients on a variety of issues relating to unmanned aircraft operation.

(Source: Frost Brown Todd news release. Image from file. Not captured during incident associated with the lawsuit)

FMI: www.kywd.uscourts.gov

Advertisement

More News

A ‘Crazy’ Tesla Flying Car is Coming

Musk Claims the Tech Could Be Unveiled Within a Couple of Months Elon Musk is once again promising the impossible…this time, in the form of a Tesla that flies. Speaking on T>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (11.xx.25): NonApproach Control Tower

NonApproach Control Tower Authorizes aircraft to land or takeoff at the airport controlled by the tower or to transit the Class D airspace. The primary function of a nonapproach co>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (11.01.25)

"It was pretty dang cool to be in a tube-and-fabric bush plane that high, and it was surreal hearing airline pilots over ATC wondering what a Cub was doing up there. The UL is trul>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (11.01.25)

Aero Linx: Lake Amphibian Club Over the years the cost of a new Skimmer or Lake went from about $16,000 to over $500,000 for many reasons. Sales of Renegades have been very sparse >[...]

Classic Aero-TV: EAA Introduces Angle of Attack Training

From 2024 (YouTube Edition): Clinic Aimed to Promote Safe Aircraft Control The EAA Pilot Proficiency Center hosted an angle of attack (AOA) training clinic during the 2024 Oshkosh >[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC