[Boats]

San Diego judge throws out industry liability suit

Common Sense (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200303%5CNAT20030307e.html)

[El Tejon]

Weren't the arguments this week? That was quick! Did he rule from the bench?

[Boats]

It failed on summary judgment. After the discovery phase is complete, the defendants (the industry) move to throw out the lawsuit. The judge must view the Bradys "evidence" in a light most favorable to their contentions and determine if there is any legal or factual issues meriting a jury trial. The judge must have thrown out the case at the conclusion of the summary judgment hearing despite the affidavit testimony of former industry "insider" Mr. Ricker, who was quoted in the papers recently as saying the industry could do more to prevent criminal acquisition of firearms and turned a blind eye to the problem.

I can imagine the judge thinking that the parallel would be castigating the automotive industry for not including breathalyzer starters on every vehicle and trying to collect damages for drunk driving by arguing that the car companies don't do their best to ascertain the driving habits of the thieves and drunks who might wind up in their products post-sale.

The sooner the industry is given immunity from illegitimate product liability and "public nuisance" novelty shakedowns, the better.

[El Tejon]

Boats, in Ewok's thread it looks like he ruled from the bench. Wow, that's a decisive victory.

I concur wholeheartedly regarding immunity. BTW, tort reform now!

[Ewok]

Calif. Judge Throws Out Suit Against Gun Industry (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=564&ncid=564&e=1&u=/nm/20030308/ts_nm/life_gunsuit_dc_1)

By Gina Keating

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Gun makers claimed victory on Friday after a San Diego judge dismissed them, weapons distributors and trade associations from a products liability lawsuit brought by major California cities against the firearms industry.

Only a half-dozen gun dealers remain in the lawsuit, which is scheduled for trial in late April.


The municipalities, including San Diego, Los Angeles and San Francisco, claim the industry created a public nuisance by supplying guns to ineligible buyers and violated state business laws by making misleading statements about the dangers of gun ownership. The suit also alleged that the firearms industry failed to incorporate safety features and to prevent guns from falling into the hands of juveniles and criminals.


Filed in 1999, the suit named 38 defendants, including weapons manufacturers and distributors and trade associations, and was brought by 12 municipalities. It is one of a dozen actions filed nationwide by public entities, and was patterned on the successful tobacco litigation brought by 46 U.S. states, which ended in a $40 billion settlement in 1998.


San Diego Superior Court Judge Vincent DiFiglia heard arguments from 36 attorneys during Friday's hearing before dismissing the 29 weapons makers, six distributors and three trade associations, finding too tenuous a relationship between them and the dealers.


The cities presented an affidavit by Robert Ricker, former head of the American Shooting Sports Council, who testified that despite their denials, gun makers and trade associations have long been aware that dealers are selling weapons illegally.


The firearms industry described DiFiglia's ruling as "a crushing defeat" for California cities and counties, which blamed the industry for contributing to more than 1,800 shooting deaths and 25,000 gun-related injuries in 1997.


"This is a definitive victory for us in a string of vindications that began a year ago when the city of Boston dropped its suit against the industry for lack of proof of wrongdoing," said Lawrence Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc., the firearms industry's major trade association and a defendant in the case.


"This victory supports the long-held principle that responsible and law-abiding manufacturers of highly regulated, non-defective firearms can not be held accountable when criminals misuse their legally sold products," he added.


Los Angeles Deputy City Attorney Don Kass said the city was satisfied with the outcome of the hearing because "the case has never been about money, it has been about preventing gun flow to unauthorized individuals and trying to stem the flow of guns to criminals in our cities."


State courts have thrown out at least six of the dozen gun liability cases filed since 1999, according to the Brady Center's The Legal Action Project, which is participating in the California suit.

[Tropical Z]

:D

[dinosaur]

Yet the taxpayers keep electing these bozos who waste their money. :banghead: