Calif. Judge Dismisses Suit against Gun Industry

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ewok

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2002
Messages
187
Location
Los Gatos, CA, USA, Earth
Calif. Judge Throws Out Suit Against Gun Industry

Calif. Judge Throws Out Suit Against Gun Industry

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.
 
Last edited:
Yes!

Now if we could just get some gun bans thrown out on 2nd amendment grounds.
 
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.

:rolleyes:

How about preventing the flow of guns to the average lawful citizen?
 
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\\Nation\\archive\\200303\\NAT20030307e.html

Calif. Judge Dismisses Suit against Gun Industry
By Robert B. Bluey
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
March 07, 2003

(CNSNews.com) - A California Superior Court judge dismissed a lawsuit Friday against gun manufacturers and distributors, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

Twelve California cities and counties sued the firearms industry for marketing guns that could be bought by criminals and youngsters.

Judge Vincent P. DiFiglia made the ruling Friday, said Gary Mehalik, spokesman for the gun-rights organization. DiFiglia had not yet ruled on a motion against trade associations, like the National Shooting Sports Foundation, Mehalik said.

"The judge has summarily dismissed the charges, meaning there is no basis here for a case," Mehalik said.

The case drew parallels to lawsuits filed against the tobacco industry in the 1990s. It even had a so-called whistle-blower in Robert A. Ricker, a former executive director at the American Shootings Sports Council and National Rifle Association lawyer.

Gun-rights groups called the lawsuit foolish, and Mehalik was hopeful DiFiglia would dismiss the suit in its entirety.

"You can't blame honest people for the things criminals do," Mehalik said. "We distribute a legally manufactured product through a chain that is licensed by the federal government. Because somebody misuses something that a manufacturer builds doesn't mean that the manufacturer has done anything wrong.

"It's the equivalent of saying that if somebody goes out and drinks and gets in a car and runs over someone, the victim's family gets to sue the person who brewed the beer and made the car," he added. "It's crazy."

Los Angeles and San Francisco were two of the cities involved in the lawsuit. Gun-control groups had no immediate reaction to the decision.
 
Hoo-rah! Take that!

Finally, some good gun-news coming out of CA for a change. I'm guessing, hoping, that the CA judicial "market" was the best chance these slugs had. Though they've trotted it out repeatedly, this particular dog just won't hunt!

Here's another article covering the situation.
-PH

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20030308-9999_1n8guns.html

California cities fail to make their case

By Alex Roth
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

March 8, 2003

A San Diego judge gutted a sweeping lawsuit against the firearms industry yesterday, ruling that several California cities involved in the action couldn't prove the nation's gun makers are to blame for weapons getting into the hands of criminals.

The ruling by Superior Court Judge Vincent Di Figlia came a month before the lawsuit was to have come to trial. It would have been the first of its kind to make it to trial.

The judge released more than 20 of the nation's leading gun manufacturers from the suit, saying there was no evidence that they could be blamed for the black market for guns in California.

Even if such evidence existed, the judge said, policing of the industry is a job better left to lawmakers and agents responsible for enforcing existing firearms laws.

The suit was filed in 1999 by a dozen cities, including San Francisco and Los Angeles, and counties. It accused gun makers and distributors of allowing weapons to fall into the hands of criminals through lax sales practices.

Among other things, the cities wanted the judge to make the gun industry responsible for cracking down on rogue dealers who have track records of allowing weapons to slip into the black market.

An executive in the firearms industry, Lawrence Keane, said Di Figlia's ruling "represents vindication of a responsible industry."

Keane, who represents the National Shooting Sports Foundation in Connecticut, said gun-control activists are trying "to blame us for the acts of criminals and to demonize our products, which are used safely and responsibly by millions of Americans."

Lawyers representing the plaintiffs said the decision would be appealed.

The plaintiffs accuse gun makers and distributors of creating a public nuisance and engaging in unfair business practices in violation of state laws.

"Obviously, we're disappointed, but certainly we feel there are strong grounds for appeal," said Dennis Henigan of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in Washington, D.C.

The organization is providing legal assistance to the plaintiffs.

The cities were suing more than 20 gun manufacturers, including Glock, Beretta U.S.A., Browning Arms Co., Smith & Wesson, Sturm, Ruger & Co. and Taurus International Manufacturing. All were dismissed from the suit yesterday.

The judge also released two trade associations from the suit.

However, he refused to release two California retailers, ruling that the cities had produced enough evidence of misconduct to warrant a trial. The retailers are Trader Sports of the San Francisco Bay Area and Andrews Sporting Goods, which has a dozen outlets in Southern California.

The judge cited an affidavit by a former agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms who said a disproportionate number of guns involved in crimes could be traced to those two retailers.

Lawyers for the cities have said the lucrative black market for guns is the result of distributors who engage in such practices as straw sales, where someone buys a gun for someone who isn't legally permitted to possess one.

Among other things, the cities contend many criminals are able to buy weapons at traveling gun shows.

Lawyers for the two retailers dispute the allegations and cite a high sales volume as a possible reason guns used by criminals are traced to the retailers.

The judge refused to dismiss a claim by the cities against three out-of-state gun distributors that the cities accuse of illegally selling certain types of guns, including banned assault weapons, to retailers in California.

The judge said there is enough evidence of misconduct to warrant a trial on that issue, as well.

By dismissing the bulk of the lawsuit, Di Figlia was following the lead of many other jurisdictions nationwide.

Similar cases in Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., Atlanta and Miami-Dade County have been thrown out of court, too. The city of Boston dropped its suit voluntarily.

Lawsuits by other cities ? Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis and New York City are among them ? are pending and haven't made it to trial.

In addition to San Francisco and Los Angeles, the plaintiffs in California included Oakland, Sacramento, West Hollywood, East Palo Alto and other California city and county governments. The case was consolidated in San Diego Superior Court by the state Judicial Council.

San Diego wasn't a participant, however. A spokeswoman for City Attorney Casey Gwinn said the city wasn't invited to participate.

The ruling yesterday came after several hours of oral argument.

The plaintiffs had been optimistic the case would make it to trial because of an affidavit filed last month by Robert A. Ricker, a former chief lobbyist and executive director of the American Shooting Sports Council.

In the affidavit, Ricker accused the industry of ignoring the problem of rogue dealers and deliberately avoiding any remedial action for fear of liability.

Yesterday, one of the lead lawyers for the plaintiffs, Michael Dowd, said the firearms industry has "intentionally decided to stick its head in the sand" on the subject of illegal gun purchases."

"Fix it now before the next person in California gets hurt," Dowd said during the hearing.

James Vogt, a lead lawyer for the firearms industry, said the cities brought the lawsuit despite the absence of any hard evidence of misconduct by gun makers. The lawsuit, he said, was "gun-control politics, pure and simple."
 
One of the reasons I left the People's Republic of California last year to return to the United States was that I got sick and tired of seeing my hard-earned tax dollars used to fund assaults against the Second Amendment.
 
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."

Baloney! If they were concerned about armed criminals, they'd do something about criminals, not firearms manufacturers and law-abiding American citizens.
 
Great news about a good call. Time to recover the gun industry's costs from the plaintiffs.... :p
 
nice thought Black Hawk but since most governments (even city governments) cannot be sued in this country unless they allow themselves to be sued [that was for THR's foreign members who might not know that] how likely is it that L.A. and San Francisco will allow themselves to be sued by firearms manufacturers?
 
Merged. No doubt Red Davis and his statist cohorts will spearhead an effort to "fix" this situation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top