Laserfiche WebLink
06/17/2883 14:54 LAW OFFICE 2148 4TH RUE ->; 42?5543 N0.574 <br />Stcve~ M. Tirol, Appellant, vs. State ofMimmsota, Kespontlent. C9-02-1365, Court ofAppeals B~blishecl..~ Page 9 of 9 <br />Anoka Count), District Court and Ham Lake were prohibited from interpreting the meaning of the FAA <br />approval letter. Appellant cites no authorily, and we have found none, for the content{on that state and local <br />governments are prohibited from interpreting documents issued by a federal agency, <br /> <br /> DECISION <br /> <br /> City of Ham Lake, Minn., City Code § 9-470 (2000), restricting the operation of regulated aircraft in <br />certain residential areas, does not violate the Equal Protection Clause, is not unconstitutionally vague, and is <br />not preempted by federal law. <br /> <br /> Affirmed. <br /> <br />- Retired judge of the ~striet court, serving as judge of the Minnesota Court of Appeals by appointment <br />pursuant to Minn. Const. art. VI, § 10. <br /> <br />http://www.lawlibrmy.state.mn.us/ar,l~ive/etappub/0303/op021365-311.btm 6/10/03 <br /> <br /> <br />