Case law on runway buzzing/flyovers

"Peter Duniho" wrote:
It's impossible to say how the case would have been decided had the
facts been different, but the decision does strongly suggest that
absent the intent to land, the low-altitude flight over the runway
would have been found in violation of the FARs. Certainly the
original FAA inspector and law judge would have found that to be the
case, considering that they found the pilot in violation even when
assuming a go-around (which, frankly, boggles the mind).

I agree - having pilots worry that a botched go-around will be second
guessed by the FAA would seem to detract from safety; e.g.: "I'm coming in
too fast - but if I do a go-around, I might get grounded by the FAA. If I
don't, I might have an accident landing."

Alas, I just found another one where the facts WERE different and the pilot
LOST his appeal:

http://www.ntsb.gov/O_n_O/docs/AVIATION/4020.PDF

Thanks for the link. It's an interesting read. I am curious...how
did you find it? Is there an easy way to search FAA certificate
actions (best) and/or NTSB reviews of FAA certificate actions (almost
as good)?

I did a regular Google search using various keyword combinations. I now
forget what worked in this case; I know "buzzing" was one of the keywords
that worked better than "flyover" in conjunction with "runway". But I see
now that the URL http://www.ntsb.gov/O_n_O/docs is a directory full of FAA
administrative legal results and the following Google search yields a whole
bunch of hits on any complaints containing the word "buzzing":

site:http://www.ntsb.gov/O_n_O/docs/AVIATION buzzing

Obviously other terms may work better.

Note too that these documents refer to other relevant cases, e.g.
"Administrator v. Hart, NTSB Order EA-2884 (1989)" (too old to be in that
online list, which seems to go only back to 1999).