Aircraft owners considering whether to allow someone else to operate their aircraft—such as by leasing or renting—should be aware that some state laws attempt to hold an aircraft owner equally liable as those operating the aircraft for any harm to life or property caused by an accident.

Driven by a seller’s market, some aircraft buyers might be tempted to save time or money by skipping a written purchase/sale agreement, prepurchase inspection, or title search. Everyone has their own tolerance for legal and financial risk, but each of these steps—when well executed—can help avoid a case of buyer’s remorse.

A recent NTSB decision involves an airline transport pilot who mistakenly took his son’s ADHD medication, resulting in a positive drug test that triggered the FAA’s revocation of his certificates. It was undisputed that the pilot accidently took the wrong medication, but the FAA maintained that revocation was appropriate for every instance of a positive drug test.

Many people have a minor legal issue in their past they’d rather forget, such as a youthful indiscretion that led to a run-in with the police or an unpaid parking ticket that meant a suspended license.

A pilot experiences an in-flight equipment malfunction but skillfully prevents an abnormal situation from becoming an emergency and lands safely. A few days later, an FAA inspector contacts the pilot to request a statement about the event along with a copy of relevant maintenance records. AOPA’s Legal Services Plan often hears from pilots in this situation.

If you’re flying under BasicMed and your latest comprehensive medical examination checklist (CMEC) was completed in 2017, then it’s time to see your doctor again.

An aborted takeoff, an unplanned turn back to the airport, or a departure from the taxiway because of a blown tire are just a few examples of an “occurrence” that the FAA mandates air traffic control to report for further investigation, regardless of whether there is any suspected wrongdoing by the pilot.

Effective September 30, 2020,  the FAA adopted a policy that provides the option of “prompt settlement” for legal enforcement actions against airmen alleged to have made a fraudulent or intentionally false statement on a medical application or other required medical documents.

“Do you currently use any medications?” is asked by both the FAA’s medical application and the BasicMed exam checklist, and it seems some applicants interpret the question in a very literal way.

Three recent NTSB decisions remind us that pilots aren’t just required to keep a current address on file with the FAA, but that we’re also responsible for continuously monitoring the mailbox for any correspondence that the FAA may be inclined to send us—even when we’re traveling.

Amid the stay-at-home orders, CDC guidance, and strain on medical professionals over the past several months, many pilots were faced with FAA medical certificates that would soon expire.

You open a certified letter from the FAA requesting you produce your logbook for inspection. It’s nearly certain you’ll have to comply, so it’s a good idea to familiarize yourself with the rule concerning logbook inspections.

Over the past year, we’ve seen the FAA intensify its efforts to shut down “illegal charter operations,” or flights transporting paying passengers in a way that runs afoul of the air carrier certification and operating rules.

Whether you’re looking to keep your third class medical or are one of the growing number of pilots thinking about leaving it behind to fly under sport pilot or BasicMed rules, it’s worth noting a recent FAA letter to AOPA that provides some helpful guidance about the medical certification process. Two of the issues addressed concern pilots in vastly different scenarios: those whose medicals have been denied, and those who are seeking to voluntarily surrender their medicals.

A proposed FAA study would randomly collect and conduct toxicology testing on 7,500 anonymous urine specimens from all pilots examined for a medical certificate over a three-year period, without the pilots’ knowledge or explicit consent. While AOPA has joined other industry associations to advocate against the study and seek alternatives, all pilots who will be applying for a medical should be aware of the proposal.

The case began with a hard landing that substantially damaged a light twin-engine airplane. The pilot reported that he was distracted by the right front seatback falling forward and interfering with his view of the airplane’s control panel. The NTSB determined the probable cause to be an improper landing flare.

A current flight review is essential for most pilots, but we see cases where this requirement is overlooked. Some pilots discover they’ve flown without a current flight review after routinely reviewing their logbook; others realize it only after a deviation, incident, or accident triggers an FAA investigation that includes the inevitable demand to demonstrate currency during the flight at issue.

Any pilot could experience a health issue that is disqualifying for a regular FAA medical certificate. If the condition is adequately controlled, however, the FAA may grant a special issuance consisting of a medical certificate and an accompanying authorization letter. But what if pilots no longer need a medical at all because the flying they do is allowed under sport pilot or BasicMed rules?

If you’re thinking of building  or buying a hangar at a public airport, carefully consider the terms of your ground lease for the land beneath it. Aircraft owners have spent tens, or even hundreds, of thousands of dollars for a hangar—only to later learn that their ground lease was expiring and would not be renewed, and the airport would assume ownership of the hangar at the end of the lease. Reckoning with the legal and financial implications of these clauses early on in your hangar planning can help avoid a costly oversight.

Before you or your aircraft take on a starring role in a video that could be shared online, consider whether you’re comfortable having the clip scrutinized by the FAA. It is increasingly common for FAA investigations to begin based on a complaint about a video shared on social media or on sites such as YouTube. These videos are often admissible as evidence against the airman.