Time to revamp traffic patterns at non-towered airports?

Thank you, but your case is totally irrelevant.

In your case, someone was trying to recover on a contract. Since the
contractor was not licensed they could not legally enter into a contract.
Since they couldn't enter into a contract, there was no contract. And since
there was no contract, they couldn't recover.

Now consider this:

I am driving my car, and pull up and stop at a red traffic signal. The
driver behind me doesn't stop quickly enough, and breaks my tail light
window and bulb.

We quickly exchange license and information and return to our cars.

The traffic light turns green; can I proceed?

Let's look at the facts:

I have a green light, which grants me an explicit right-of-way through the
intersection.

I have a totally non-functional tail-light on my car, which is generally
some violation of the motor vehicle code.

So, under Mr. Patterson's interpretation, I would never be allowed to
proceed through the intersection unless I had a mechanic come to the
intersection to repair my tail-light.

Obviously, this would be silly, and it's not correct.

Normally, a grant of right-of-way is for a specific action(s). And the right
of way is normally granted for a period long enough to accomplish the
action. I could not take advantage of the right-of-way granted to me and
pull into the intersection and stop, blocking all other traffic. When the
light changed, granting a right-of-way to traffic coming from either side,
by right=of-way would end, barring special circumstances.

But, broken tail-light or no, I would be granted the right-of-way when the
light turned green.

One interesting point, if the light turned green, but an ambulance or
firetruck were coming into the intersection, in most jurisdictions my
right-of-way would be superseded by a "special" right of way normally
enjoyed by emergency vehicles.


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 8 Feb 2004 11:42:39 -0600, "Bill Denton"
wrote in Message-Id:
:


Would you be good enough to post a link supporting your assertion that:
"it
is a basic and well established legal principle that you lose your right
of
way if you are in violation of the laws or regulations"?

I haven't read all of the FAR's yet so I suppose that could be true in
the
aviation world, but I can tell you that your supposition is totally false
in
the larger world of US law.

I won a case in 1996 filed by an unlicensed building contractor who
was demanding payment. The judge found that the California law denied
unlicensed contractors legal remedy. I could research the statute,
and so can you: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html

From: "Bill Denton"
Date: 2/9/2004 3:53 PM Central Standard Time

in most jurisdictions my
right-of-way would be superseded by a "special" right of way normally
enjoyed by emergency vehicles.


Now you just keep that in mind if ya see me on final. Some of my landings look
like an emergency in progress! Well I'm not that bad. mac

"Mackfly" wrote in message
...
Now you just keep that in mind if ya see me on final. Some of my landings
look
like an emergency in progress!

Then it wouldn't be you that has the right-of-way. It would be the fire
trucks coming to put your airplane out who have the right-of-way.

On 10 Feb 2004 04:00:23 GMT, (Mackfly) wrote in
Message-Id: :

Some of my landings look like an emergency in progress!

I've had that happen to me too. They rolled the fire trucks on one
particularly steep slipping descent into KSNA (John Wayne Airport).
The rate of descent must have been good enough to set off some ATC
alarm or something. Nobody said a word, but the fire fighters looked
a little disappointed as I taxied past them after landing.