Meric Alan Murphy v. Marion C. Blakey , 94 F. App'x 436 ( 2004 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 03-2776
    ___________
    Meric Alan Murphy,                    *
    *
    Petitioner,               *
    * Petition for Review of an Order
    v.                              * of the National Transportation
    * Safety Board.
    Marion C. Blakey, Administrator,      *
    Federal Aviation Administration,      *    [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Respondent.               *
    ___________
    Submitted: April 6, 2004
    Filed: April 15, 2004
    ___________
    Before MELLOY, HANSEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Meric Alan Murphy petitions for review of an order of the National
    Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) denying his challenge to the suspension of his
    pilot’s license. For the following reasons, we deny the petition.
    The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) suspended Murphy’s commercial
    pilot certification for 60 days for violating 
    14 C.F.R. § 91.13
    (b) (2001) (no person
    may operate aircraft on any surface of airport in careless or reckless manner so as to
    endanger life or property of another). Murphy appealed and, after a hearing, an
    administrative law judge (ALJ) affirmed the suspension. Murphy then appealed to
    the full NTSB, which denied his appeal and affirmed the ALJ’s decision. Murphy
    now argues that the FAA did not satisfy its burden of proof.
    We disagree. Substantial evidence supported the agency’s factual findings.
    Unrebutted testimony at the hearing established that Murphy was asleep in an idling
    and unsecured aircraft, and that at some point he left the idling aircraft. See Reder
    v. FAA, 
    116 F.3d 1261
    , 1263 (8th Cir. 1997) (deferential standard of review requires
    affirming so long as agency decision is not arbitrary, capricious, abuse of discretion,
    or otherwise not supported by law); Erickson v. NTSB, 
    758 F.2d 285
    , 288 (8th Cir.
    1985) (NTSB’s inference from circumstantial evidence that violation of regulation
    occurred is not impermissible step if supported by substantial evidence).
    Accordingly, we deny Murphy’s petition for review.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-2776

Citation Numbers: 94 F. App'x 436

Filed Date: 4/15/2004

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023