12/09/201 1 101 2 FAX 202493514 2 FA A ^ DM S 0001/00 3

U.S . DEPARTMEN T O F TRANSPORTATIO N

OFHC E O F HEARING S WASHINGTON , D.C . 

# RECEIVE D DE C 

### - 6 20 H 

# HEARIN G DOCKE T FEDERA L AVIATIO N ADMINISTRATION .

Complainant/Appellee , V . RUSHMOR E HELICOPTERS , INC .

Respondent/Appellant . FA A DOCKE T NO . CP10GL000 2 (Civi l Penalt

y Action )

State o f Sout h Dakota ) •)ss . Count y o f Penningto n ) DM S No . fAA-2010.-0023 : ^ ^ 

# i i s 

# > M AFFIDAVI T O F MICHAE L JACO B r n lil J

Come s no^v , Michae l Jacob , bein g firs t dul y swo mo

n hi s oath , wh o depose s an d state s a s follows : 1 . 1 a mth e President

an d sol e stockholder

o f Rushmore Helicopters , Inc. . a Sout h Dakot a"S " corporation . 2

- J a mno t a n attorne y an

d 1 hav e n o lega

l training . 3 . Rushmore Helicopters , Inc . ("Rushmore" ) acte d pr o s e throug h me a t th e time o f th e hearin g o

n Apri l 27 , 201 1 an

d a t al l time s prio r

i n thi s matter

becaus e o f financial reasons . 4 . Prio r

t o th e hearin g an

d durin g th e approximatel y one yea r perio d of tim e befor e th e same , I ha

d communicate d o

n occasio n wit

h Complainant' s the n counsel , Mr . Chri s Zurales . Mr . Zurale s ha d propose d resolvin g thi s matter b y offerin g tha

t Rushmore pa y areduce dfme . I tol d hi mtha t th e busines s simply did no t hav e th e wherewitha

l to pa y an y typ e o f

substantial fme . Th e las t

proposal he mad e wa s h e woul d reduc e i t to S16„'i00.00 , an d T tol d hi

mtha t th e busines s coul d no t

affor d tha t muc h o f afin e either . Hence , th e matte r

wen t to hearing .12/09/201 1 101 2 FAX 202493514 2 FA A - DM S ^002/00 3

5 . Ther

e wa s n o discussio n a

t the time of

th e hearin g about

abilit y to pay . I trul y though t

th e focu s o f

th e hearin g wa s o

n whether there wa s aviolatio n o r

not and , i f so , th e exten t

o f the same . 6 . Referenc e wa s mad e a t th e hearin g to Blac k

Hill s Aeria

l Adventures , Inc . whic h i s aseparate company tha t operate s ou

t o f Q completely separate locatio n an d i s it s own distinc t

an d separate busines s operation . I t doe s no t **share " employee s wit

h Rushmor e a s was suggeste d a

t th e hearing . Tha

t company , lik

e Rushmore . use s employee s fromanother

company a s they ar

e no t al l neede d ful

l time a t one location . Ruslimor e i s adistinc t

an d separate busines s entit

y operatin g ou

t of Keystone , Sout

h Dakota , an

d it s primar

y focu s ha^

; bee n t o provid e tour." ; o f

Moun t Rushmor e Nationa l Monumen t an d th e immediate are aaroun d it . 7 . Th e perso n wh o filedth e complaint agains t Rushmor e i n thi s cas e (Mar

y Davis ) i s als o th e same perso n wh o ha s filed acivi l lawsui t agains t Rushmor e alon g wit

h thre e other

plaintiffs , tw o o

f whomoperat

e businesse s next

door t o the helipad an d on

e wh o ha s avacatio n hom

e severa l mile s away . The

y eac h hav e complaine d tha

t Rushniore' s operatio n i

n Keyston e constimte s a"nui.iance " an d i s interruptin g thei r businesse s or

their peace . Thes e suit s ar

e bein g vigorousl y defended b y Rushmore . Ms . Davis ' lawsui t

was commence d i

n th e middl e summe

r of 2010 , afte r she mad e thi s complaint to the FAA . Mar

y Davi s i s aco-plaintif

f wit h Stanfor d Adelstei n an

d thei r lawsui t i s filed i n circui t court , Penningto n County , Sout h Dakota , Civ . No . 10-1866 . A second lawsui t

wa s filed b y acquaintance s of her s (Dea n Botiorf f an d Joanel l Ackerman) , als o allegin g nuisance , an

d tha t matte r i s pendin g a

s wel l i n circui t cour t fo r Penningto n County , Sout

h Dakota . Civ . No . 10-1023 . 8 . Th e lawsuit s als o nam

e Rushmore' s forme

r landlor d (KSD , Inc. ) a s a defendant . Rushmor

e wa s leasin g it s Keyston e operation s sit e fromKS D throug h 201 0 an d 1 believe dtha

t 1 woul d stil l b e abl e t o hav e the leas e beginnin g Jun e 201 1 (approximatel y 5 week s afte r th e hearin g i n thi s case ) but tha t subsequentl y turne d out

t o b e wrong . Thes e lawsuit s bega n t o escalate i

n th e fe w month s befor

e th e hearin g i n Apri l 20 1 ] an dtherefor

e place d aseriou s financia l hardship o

n Rushmor

e i n tha t i t ha d to hire lega l coun.se l to defend it . A

t the time o f

th e hearin g i

n thi s case , i

t wa s uncertai n a s to wher e th e lawsuit s woul d go . Whil e i t appeare d tha

t ther e ma y b e reasonabl e chance s fo r•"- I • <u , 1 ^ M X 2024935U 2 FA A ^ DI^ S @003/00 3

Novemb:!"2o1t ' " ' ^"° " " "^'"^ ^ "' ^ ' y ^-'>- ' J-o b thi s ^? ^ da y o f

^ VIRGINI A L . HARMO N fj , l ^ (SCAbtAR Y PUBLI C ^ 1 ^ Stat e o f Soui h Dakot a ^ .••//^JV^--^ . .>:6^./.-»^r'v. ^ Notar y Public , Sout

h Dakota M y Commissio n Expire s _/Vi^--^- '