The Virginian-Pilot
©
CHESAPEAKE
A jury has awarded no money to a couple in their lawsuit against the Chesapeake Airport Authority, in what airport officials said vindicated their decision to defend against noise-pollution lawsuits rather than settle.
George and Margaret Osipovs sued the authority in 2004, saying the airport's noise and traffic decreased the value of their home. Chesapeake Circuit Court Judge Randy Smith ruled in 2007 that the Osipovs' property had been harmed, but a jury decided Friday not to award any money in damages.
"I wouldn't say it was a surprise," said Lee Lowder, chair of the authority board. "We always felt that the suit had little, if any, merit."
The Osipovs' lawyer, Joseph Waldo, said he plans to appeal, based on the idea that the jury ignored Smith's ruling that the Osipovs' home value had been damaged.
The city has spent more than $300,000 defending itself against the Osipovs' suit, which Waldo said could have been settled for far less.
But settling to avoid a costly trial could open the authority to a raft of other claims, airport lawyer Patrick O'Donnell said in an e-mail.
"Sometimes the easiest and cheapest way out of an immediate problem is not the responsible course of action," O'Donnell said. He also said the authority had never received an official settlement offer.
The authority still faces more than a dozen additional lawsuits that allege damage from the noise and traffic of the airport.
Lowder said he hopes those cases will be dropped after this verdict.
"I would be more than a little surprised were these other lawsuits to go forward," he said. "I'm not sure what prospect the plaintiffs would have."
Waldo called the authority "defiant" and said it was committed to "spend whatever money it takes out of the Chesapeake taxpayers."
"Those lawsuits are going forward," he said, "because the court has determined that the property has been damaged."
Alicia Wittmeyer, (757) 222-5216, alicia.wittmeyer@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yea!!! Finally. Hey people....if you buy a house near an airport...Hello, you are going to hear....wait for it....wait for it.....AIRPLANE NOISE. DUH.
Shame Shame
These people with their lawsuits against the Chesapeake Airport need to learn to make money the old fashioned way. Work for it! Instead they sit around dreaming up ways to get out of work. Thank the jury!
Shame on Judge Randall Smith for even hearing this case. Wonder if they are cronies?
Finally
Finally, a jury with some common sense!
When they moved in...
They moved in AFTER it was built but BEFORE it was expanded...that is what they are saying the problem is, that after it was expanded there was more noise...um I think not and I have lived on West Road since the late 70's.
What changed
Flights leaving or arriving at CPK under visual flight rules fly a pattern that avoids passing over that subdivision. But now there is an ILS instrument approach to the airport which requires aircraft making, or practicing, an instrument approach t fly a fixed path which is lower and closer to those houses, so there has been a change in the noise level they experience.
However, though the ILS approach was installed after they built there, it has been in the airport's published master plan for decades.
I would think that if you build directly in line with the runway of an airport, due diligence would require you check to see if there are plans for lengthening the runway or adding an ILS approach before building.
If those residents have a gripe with anyone, I would think it would be the developer of the subdivision, not the airport. But ultimately, how much effort does it take to look at a map before buying a house?
good
These people bought a house near the airport and then sued...what idiots. The city should be reimbursed for their legal fees for this frivilous law suit.
Actually
These people bought a house next to the airport, sold it at a profit and are not living there anymore. They seem to think that they can make more money by trying to sue the city...(actually suing you and me) because it will come from our taxes. Duh, if you don't like airport noise, DON'T MOVE NEXT TO AN AIRPORT. And by the way, for all those who are complaining about jet noise...think of how (economically) quiet it will be here if the Navy decides to move more carriers to some other base. The bigger sound will be that of the unemployed calling in their claims on Sunday mornings. Be careful, you might get what you wish for.
The vast majority of those
The vast majority of those who complain about Oceana live nowhere near the base. Not even close to it. The Navy acted in bad faith by operating outside of it's own maps and at a lower height. The jets are far louder than anything these small planes can produce. Why should a homeowner keep quiet when they have been repeatedly victimized by the Navy? Then to add to it the city and others spellbound by the money tell them to shut up and take it. Foul little people.
Better to settle? NOT!
The money was well spent, if in fact, it does cause the other suits to be Dropped!
Kudos to the jury!
The article doesn't say when the Osipovs moved into their home......before, or after the Airport was built?
Why, why, why do people continue to buy houses near airports, (commmercial or Military), train tracks, hospitals only to complain later and have the taxpayers be punished for their decision?
I know of numerous companies who use the Chesapeake Airport to fly into for local business meeting, etc., so, unlike the Va.Beach city golf courses.....there is a valid economic reason to keep it!
Airport
I have lived almost my entire life within 2 miles of that Airport and the noise is the same as it's ever been. I'm very happy to see them not get any money and I think it was a HUGE waste of time for them to sue.