Gun Ruling To Have National Impact


Updated: Fri, Apr 27 10:29 AM EDT
By JOEL STASHENKO, Associated Press Writer
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) - A ruling by the state's top court that gun makers can't be held liable for shooting deaths and injuries because of their marketing practices is certain to have an impact on dozens of such cases nationwide, lawyers say.

The Court of Appeals's decision Thursday also probably dooms a $4 million federal court award to a New York City man who was left permanently disabled at age 15 when he was shot by a friend in 1994.

Gun makers said the unanimous decision will set an example for judges across the country hearing about three dozen similar cases.

"It's an important decision, both from the standpoint of New York state law and from the standpoint of national litigation raising similar issues," said attorney Lawrence Greenwald, who represented Beretta USA and American Arms.

Lawyers for shooting victims said the decision presents attorneys with a blueprint on how to successfully pursue other cases along the same legal grounds.

"We didn't reach the destination today, but the decision gives us guidance how to get there," said lawyer Marc Elovitz, who represented Stephen Fox of the New York City borough of Queens and his family. "It was a road map and not a dead end."

Fox and the relatives of six people killed by handguns won a verdict against gun makers in federal court in Brooklyn in 1999.

Beretta USA, American Arms and another gun maker, Taurus International Manufacturing, were assessed damages of up to $272,000.

Gun makers were found liable in the six other instances, but no monetary damages were awarded in those cases.

The federal appeals court reviewing the verdicts at the urging of the manufacturers had asked the New York Court of Appeals whether state laws support the finding of negligence in such a gun violence case.

Writing for the court, Judge Richard Wesley said lawyers for the gunshot victims alluded to "broad" and "general" ways that gun manufacturers are liable for handgun injuries, but they failed to show specifically how their sales and marketing led to their guns getting into the wrong hands.

A "more tangible" direct link is needed to show how the gun makers contributed to the injuries of gunshot victims and that the manufacturers "were realistically in a position to prevent the wrongs," Wesley wrote.

Wesley explicitly ended his ruling by noting that a different marketing negligence claim involving a different set of circumstances might well win the next time around.

Chicago and Bridgeport, Conn., are among about two dozen municipalities that have sued gun manufacturers over the cost of crimes and injuries caused by handguns. In addition, about 10 shooting victims or their survivors are pursuing negligence suits against gun makers, Greenwald said.

Who all was getting sued?

Was SIG Arms,glock or H&K getting sued too?

And why would the Fed.Goverment let a city/state sue Berretta? They make the standard military side-arm,I figured Berretta would have some clout because of that.

Thank God. Let's hope it does have a National impact.
P.S. D. Fienstien is Satan.

All I can say is "it's about freakin time!!!"

mattjedi[x]

This is a huge win, but FAR from over.

Those pricks think that since they know why they lost this round, they now know how to approach the lawsuits from a new angle to win these cases.

I think they're blowin' smoke and just are trying to save face. Then again....who knows.

Of course they are going to try from a different angle [:(!] These freakin lawyer's are getting paid for this. They know how to line their pocket's with other people's money.

Hey you Stinkin Liberal Attorney's  [-!-]

Actually, the plaintifs lost this case. No doubt their attorneys worked on a contingency basis. Which means they don't get anything if they lose! They have to eat all the expenses of the trial, all the expert witness fees, all the costs of the overhead, litigation, and appeals! Plus no attorney's fees! LOL

This is exactly the kind of 2nd Amend issue that makes ALL the difference in our freedom down the road.

I hope gun owners everywhere pay close attention to this subject, because it is obviously the greatest threat firearms makers have ever faced in this country.

You know what makes me sick? There are PLENTY of gun laws in this country, far too many actually. When the anti's can't get satisfaction out of a democratic process and existing laws, they resort to changing the rules, not by popular decision, but by aggressive legal action to overturn the will of the people. They feel entitled to bypass the democratic process in order to persue their own intrests.

When the will of the people can be threatened by a hand full of powerful attorneys, and our freedoms are on the chopping block....when the democratic process is bypassed to force the will of the extreme left through at the expense of true freedom, it is a dark day for all Americans.

The tactics the anti's use could not be more anti-freedom or anti-American.
[img]http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/bishop042/2ndamdt.gif[/img]

Ok, if I get run over by a Chevrolet, then I'm suing Chevy.  If I get stabbed with a Buck knife, then I'm suing Buck.  If pickle my liver then I'm suing the liquor store.  Jeez, when does it end?

" 'Necessity' is the plea for every infringement of human liberty; it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."--William Pitt

Pretty profound for an Englishman huh?

The ruling was 7-0 in favor of reason.

Wow.... There are actually SEVEN people with BRAINSin New York?

Must be the only ones who DIDN'T vote for Hillary...

2 Out of 3 ain't bad.  With the Chevy and the Buck examples, there is a 3d person who breaks the chain of causation.  The booze example only applies to self-inflicted harm.  You are on the right track, though.

Guess now I can sue the beer companies for my ever growing gut.
Jimmy Dean sausage for my high cholesterol

Neither of these manufacturer have ever mentioned any of these health risk.

I just found this story in the local paper, buried at the tail end of the sports section. What sport this is????? I think the liberal newspaper wanted to bury the story....

Just was ready to post it.......and here she be!

Finially some good news from this friggin state.

Later,
Dan Tucker
Upstate NY

Somebody else posted this last week but I'll use it again.

[url]www.frenchu.com/gun/guns_watch.html[/url]

How much simpler can it be!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wow, if it did not make it in NY then the outlook for that ridiculous junk is good.  Didn't they just do the same thing in Texas and in addition ruled that the gun manufactures are owed for their losses?  

You REALLY found this story in the SPORTS section?!? Gee, I wonder if the publisher is a total leftist freak(like most of them.)?

Finally, a common sense ruling!!

Yeah this is great and coming from New York no less...

But it is happening all over.  The City of Cincinnati tried to sue gun makers too.  The jusgde threw the SOB and their case out on their asses.  Here is a link to that story [url]http://enquirer.com/editions/1999/10/08/loc_judge_dismisses.html[/url]

Yes, this may be the end of the lawsuit fad, but we still have the damn laws on the books.

new york is actually behind the times, so to speak.  i know that indiana and north (i think) carolina have already gone down this path with similar results.  and though i can't say for sure, i seem to remember that these aren't the only states.  

however, because new york is so high profile and so vociferously anti-gun, this is a huge case.  much bigger point made there than the same situation in indiana.  i would have been shocked to see indiana do anything different.  heck, our democrat governor is more conservative than many republicans.  

ah, the comfort of a good ol' christian conservative state where even the democrats are conservative (except julia carson:  she's a female jesse jackson).

I love Jimmy Dean sausage!

One good thing about this ruling is now city govt's will have to think twice about wasting tax payer dollars on these lawsuits. NY, thanks to NYC, is a liberal state, so if it doesn't fly there there is hope for the rest of us.

What happened with the Chicago suit? Is it still in motion?

This is very good news.

It boils down to the love of the $$$$$$$$$$$$Some will sell their soul to the devil for it

National impact only if the prk is excluded.