Court cases by landowners are a certantity............................. the US Supreme Court decision in "US v Causby" recognised that a landowner has rights in the "lower reaches of the airspace":

"<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; font-family: sans-serif; ">At the same time, the law, and the Supreme Court, recognized that a landowner had property rights in the lower reaches of the airspace above their property. The law, in balancing thepublic interestin using the airspace forair navigationagainst the landowner's rights, declared that a landowner owns only so much of the airspace above their property as they may reasonably use in connection with their enjoyment of the underlying land. In other words, a person's real property ownership includes a reasonable amount of the airspace above the property. A landowner can't arbitrarily try to prevent aircraft from overflying their land by erecting "spite poles," for example. But, a landowner may make any legitimate use of their property that they want, even if it interferes with aircraft overflying the land".

Brad<br type="_moz" /></span>