Gary Jet Center, Inc. v. AFCO AvPorts Management LLC

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-Airport Authority’s motion to dismiss section 1983 action by plaintiff-entity providing services to airlines at airport, alleging that defendant’s notice to plaintiff that it intended to amend its rules and regulations to require that plaintiff pay defendant 1.5 percent of its revenues and increase its rent payments to defendant violated Contracts Clause of Constitution, because said amendments impaired plaintiff’s rights as contained in existing lease agreement with defendant. Plaintiff could not bring Contracts Clause action because it failed to show that it did not have available remedy in form of breach of contract action. Moreover, because defendant’s primary argument is that parties had agreed pursuant to prior settlement agreement that amended rules and regulations would govern terms of parties’ lease, instant dispute is matter of contract interpretation that could be resolved in breach of contract action without resolution of any constitutional claim. Ct. noted, though, that if defendant raised its regulatory authority as defense in future contract action, plaintiff could refile Contracts Clause claim in federal court.