Taxpayer Funded Reckless Lawsuits Against The Firearms Industry

Posted on August 14, 2005

Print
Email
Share
Taxpayer Funded Reckless Lawsuits
Against The Firearms Industry

** = CASE CLOSED

PLAINTIFFS

City of New Orleans

Date, Court Case #

10/30/98 Louisiana Supreme Court 2000-CA-1132

DEFENDANTS

15 manufacturers and distributors, 5 dealers, 3 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Defective design, negligent distribution

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

YES -- passed 4/99

CASE STATUS

State Supreme Court reversed lower court decision 4/3/01 and DISMISSED all claims. U.S. Supreme Court DENIED CERT. on 10/9/01. **


PLAINTIFFS

City of Chicago & Cook County Illinois

Date, Court Case#

11/12/98 amended 4/7/99, IL App. Ct. 1st Judicial District 00-3541

DEFENDANTS

22 manufacturers and distributors, 12 dealers

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, defective design, nuisance

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

CONSOLIDATED & DISMISSED at trial. Appealed to Illinois 1st Dist. App. court. Argument. heard 12/2001. Public nuisance claim allowed to proceed 11/4/02. IL Sup. Ct. granted appeal on 4/8/03. Argument 9/10/03. DISMISSED 11/18/04. **


PLAINTIFFS

State of Illinois

Date, Court Case#

11/14/00 Cir. Ct. Cook County 00-CH-016394

DEFENDANTS

4 manufacturers, 8 distributors

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Public nuisance

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

Motion to dismiss filed on 1/29/01. Argument 1/10/02. DISMISSED. **


PLAINTIFFS

Miami-Dade County, FL

Date, Court Case#

1/27/99 FL Supreme Ct. SC-01861

DEFENDANTS

26 manufacturers and distributors, 3 associations, 2 dealers

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Defective design, deceptive advertising, negligent distribution

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

YES -- SB 412 signed by Gov. Bush 5/1/01

CASE STATUS

DISMISSED at trial 12/13/99, DISMISSED at Appellate Court 2/14/01, appealed to State Supreme Court. Grant of cert denied 10/24/01. **


PLAINTIFFS

Bridgeport, CT

Date, Court Case#

1/27/99 amended 4/22/99 CT Supreme Court SC-16465

DEFENDANTS

21 manufacturers and distributors, 12 dealers, 3 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, defective design, deceptive advertising, nuisance, conspiracy, unjust enrichment

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

DISMISSED at trial 12/10/99, appealed 12/29/99, transferred to CT. Sup. Ct. AFFIRMED on 10/9/01 **

PLAINTIFFS

Atlanta, GA

Date, Court Case#

2/5/99 Court of Appeals, GA A01A2521

DEFENDANTS

14 manufacturers and distributors, 3 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Defective & negligent design, conspiracy, negligent distribution

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

YES -- passed 2/99

CASE STATUS

DISMISSED 2/13/02 by Ct. of Appeals citing lawsuit preemption statute. No appeal to GA Sup. Court filed **


PLAINTIFFS

Cleveland, OH

Date, Court Case#

4/8/99 US Dist. Ct. N. Dist. Of OH 1:99-CK-1134

DEFENDANTS

17 manufacturers and distributors, 3 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Defective design, nuisance, unjust enrichment

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

Motion to dismiss DENIED 3/14/00. DISMISSED on 1/21/05 however plaintiffs may re-file before 1/23/06.


PLAINTIFFS

Detroit, MI (consolidated with Wayne County)

Date, Court Case#

4/26/99 MI Ct. of Appeals

DEFENDANTS

24 manufacturers and distributors, 11 dealers

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, nuisance

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

YES -- passed 6/2000 -- On 3/30/01 the trial court ruled it unconstitutional but was overturned by appeals court 8/7/03.

CASE STATUS

Trial Ct. DISMISSED negligence but DENIED nuisance & lawsuit preemption on 3/23/01 as unconstitutional as applied. Appeals Ct. argument heard 11/19/02. DISMISSED on all counts finding preemption valid and applicable 8/7/03. **


PLAINTIFFS

Wayne County, MI
(consolidated with Detroit)

Date, Court Case#

4/26/99 MI Ct. of Appeals

DEFENDANTS

24 manufacturers and distributors, 11 dealers

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, nuisance

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

YES -- passed 6/2000 -- On 3/30/01 the trial court ruled it unconstitutional but was overturned by appeals court 8/7/03.

CASE STATUS

Trial Ct. DISMISSED negligence but DENIED nuisance & lawsuit preemption on 3/23/01 as unconstitutional as applied. Appeals Ct. argument heard 11/19/02. DISMISSED on all counts finding preemption valid and applicable 8/7/03. **


PLAINTIFFS

Cincinnati, OH

Date, Court Case#

4/28/99 Supreme Ct., OH 00-1705

DEFENDANTS

16 manufacturers and distributors, 3 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, defective design, deceptive advertising, nuisance

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

DISMISSED, at trial, AFFIRMED by Court of Appeals. A split OH Sup. Ct. reinstated case 6/12/02. Back in trial court. Trade Assoc.'s dismissed from suit on 11/15/02. City dropped suit on 4/30/03. **



PLAINTIFFS

St. Louis, MO

Date, Court Case#

4/30/99 City of St. Louis Circuit Ct. 992-01209

DEFENDANTS

25 manufacturers and distributors, 2 dealers, 3 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, defective design, deceptive advertising, nuisance, conspiracy, unjust enrichment

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

DISMISSED 10/15/03. Appealed 11/25/03. DISMISSAL affirmed on 7/27/04 by Ct. of App. Plaintiffs on 9/20/04 filed appeal w/MO Sup. Ct. DENIED on 10/26/04. **


PLAINTIFFS

CITIES OF NORTH CA Oakland, Berkeley, Sacramento, East Palo Alto, San Francisco, Alameda County, San Mateo County

Date, Court Case#

5/25/99 Case coordinated with cities below. Superior Court, San Diego.
JCCP # 4095

DEFENDANTS

28 manufacturers, 6 distributors and dealers, 3 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, nuisance, defective design, deceptive advertising, fraudulent business practices

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO -- Product liability protection at CA. CIV. CODE § 1714.4 was repealed 9/25/02

CASE STATUS

Summary judgment 1/3/03. DISMISSED in part on 3/7/03. Appeal filed 6/9/03. Settlement by lesser non-dismissed defendants while appeal pending. Def's reply brief filed 5/04. Oral argument heard 12/2/04. On 2/10/05 the dismissal was affirmed. **


PLAINTIFFS

CITIES OF SOUTH CA Los Angeles, Compton, West Hollywood, Inglewood

Date, Court Case#

5/25/99 Case coordinated with cities above. Superior Court, San Diego.
JCCP # 4095

DEFENDANTS

39 manufacturers, 5 distributors, 5 dealers, 3 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, nuisance, defective design, deceptive advertising, fraudulent business practices

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO -- Product liability protection at CA. CIV. CODE § 1714.4 was repealed 9/25/02

CASE STATUS

Summary judgment 1/3/03. DISMISSED in part on 3/7/03. Appeal filed 6/9/03. Settlement by lesser non-dismissed defendants while appeal pending. Def's reply brief filed 5/04. Oral argument heard 12/2/04. On 2/10/05 the dismissal was affirmed. **


PLAINTIFFS

County of Los Angeles, CA

Date, Court Case#

8/6/99 Case coordinated with cities above. JCCP # 4095

DEFENDANTS

28 manufacturers, 6 distributors and dealers, 3 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, nuisance, defective design, deceptive advertising, fraudulent business practices

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO -- Product liability protection at CA. CIV. CODE § 1714.4 was repealed 9/25/02

CASE STATUS

Summary judgment 1/3/03. DISMISSED in part on 3/7/03. Appeal filed 6/9/03. Settlement by lesser non-dismissed defendants while appeal pending. Def's reply brief filed 5/04. Oral argument heard 12/2/04. On 2/10/05 the dismissal was affirmed. **




PLAINTIFFS

Camden Co., NJ

Date, Court Case#

6/2/99US Dist. Ct, Dist. Of New Jersey 99-CV-2518

DEFENDANTS

22 manufacturers

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, defective design, assault and/or battery, economic interference

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

U.S. District Ct. DISMISSED 12/5/00, appealed to U.S. 3rd Cir. Ct. App. 1/3/01. Argument heard 9/4/01. DISMISSED 11/16/01. No appeal to U.S. Sup. Court. **


PLAINTIFFS

Boston, MA

Date, Court Case#

6/3/99 Superior Court, Suffolk County 99-2590

DEFENDANTS

29 manufacturers and distributors, 3 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, defective design, deceptive advertising, nuisance, unjust enrichment

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

Motion to dismiss DENIED 7/13/00, interlocutory appeal denied 9/19/00, the 3 trade associations filed a separate motion dismiss for lack of jurisdiction - DENIED 11/20/00. Discovery completed 1/19/02. Trial was scheduled for 9/24/02. The city decided to drop its suit 3/27/02 **


PLAINTIFFS

City of Newark, NJ

Date, Court Case#

6/9/99 Superior Ct. of NJ, Essex County ESX-L-6059-99

DEFENDANTS

28 manufacturers, 2 distributors, 2 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, defective design, deceptive advertising, nuisance, unjust enrichment

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

DISMISSED partially and DENIED dismissal of negligent marketing & distribution claim 12/11/01. Appealed. On 3/11/03 AFFIRMED. DISMISSED 12/4/03. DISMISSED with prejudice on 3/10/04. **


PLAINTIFFS

City of Camden, NJ

Date, Court Case#

6/21/99 Superior Ct. of NJ, Camden County CAM-4510-99

DEFENDANTS

19 manufacturers and 3 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, defective design, deceptive advertising, nuisance, unjust enrichment

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

Oral argument on a motion to dismiss heard 2/22/01. DISMISSED without prejudice 7/7/03. Jennings and Bryco filed for bankruptcy. **


PLAINTIFFS

City of Gary, IN

Date, Court Case#

8/27/99 Lake Superior Ct. 45-D05-0005-CT-243

DEFENDANTS

21 manufacturers & distributors, 3 assoc., 5 dealers

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution & marketing, negligence, nuisance

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

YES- Effective 4/18/2001

CASE STATUS

DISMISSED 1/23/01. 1st amended complaint DISMISSED 3/13/01. Appealed on 4/13/01. On 9/20/02 App. Ct. upheld dismissal of all but 3 dealer defendants. Indiana Sup. Ct. reinstated case on 12/23/03. Now in discovery. 1 dealer reportedly settled in May 2005.


PLAINTIFFS

City of Wilmington, DE

Date, Court Case#

9/29/99 Del. Superior Ct., New Castle County 99-C-09-283

DEFENDANTS

12 manufacturers, 3 associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, marketing, design, warnings, nuisance, fraud, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

DISMISSED by Superior Court. A decision to not file an appeal was made on 12/26/02. **


PLAINTIFFS

Wash., D.C.

Date, Court Case#

1/20/00 DC Superior Ct., Civ. Div. 00-000428

DEFENDANTS

25 manufacturers, 4 distributors

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, strict liability, public nuisance

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

Oral argument 4/13/01. 12/16/02 case DISMISSED. On 4/29/04 DC Ct. of App. upheld part and reversed on "absolute" liability claims. On 5/14/04 both parties petitioned for rehearing. It was granted 10/19/04. En banc hearing held 1/11/05. On 4/21/05 DC Ct. of App. held that individuals could sue under the D.C. assault weapon strict liability law. Def's appealed to US Sup. Ct. on 7/20/05. Cert. was denied on 10/3/05.


PLAINTIFFS

City of Philadelphia

Date, Court Case#

4/11/00 Ct. of Common Pleas, Phila County 00-1442

DEFENDANTS

14 manufacturers and distributors

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, public nuisance

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

YES -- passed 12/99

CASE STATUS

U.S. Dist. Ct. DISMISSED 12/20/00, appealed to U.S. 3rd Cir. Ct. of Appeals. AFFIRMED 1/11/02. City did not appeal further. **


PLAINTIFFS

City of New York

Date, Court Case#

5/20/00 US Dist. Ct., ED NY 1:00-CV-3641

DEFENDANTS

24 manufacturers and distributors, 3 trade associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, public nuisance, deceptive advertising

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

Defendants did not file a motion to dismiss. Discovery is ongoing at this time. Stay was lifted on 1/13/04 and the city was allowed to amend its complaint. A writ of mandamus to recuse Judge Weinstein was denied on 5/21/04. Discovery continues. Trial is set for 11/27/05.


PLAINTIFFS

State of New York

Date, Court Case#

6/26/00 NY Superior Ct. NY County 402586/00

DEFENDANTS

25 manufacturers and distributors

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Negligent distribution, public nuisance

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

DISMISSED 8/10/01 by trial court. DISMISSED again by Appeals Court 6/24/03. On 7/28/03 the A.G. filed another appeal. DISMISSED 10/21/03 by NY Court of Appeals. **



PLAINTIFFS

Jersey City v. Smith & Wesson et al

Date, Court Case#

3/28/02 Sup. Ct. Of NJ, Hudson County.

DEFENDANTS

12 manufacturers, 2 dealers, 3 trade associations

ALLEGED CLAIMS

Public nuisance

LAWSUIT PREEMPTION

NO

CASE STATUS

Complaint filed on 3/28/02. A motion to dismiss was not filed. Plaintiff's voluntarily DISMISSED case on 11/7/03. **


Print
Email
Share