Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN News

Taxpayer Funded Reckless Lawsuits Against The Firearms Industry

Sunday, August 14, 2005

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. **


TRENDING NOW
Beto Going All-In on Confiscation

News  

Sunday, September 15, 2019

Beto Going All-In on Confiscation

Democrat Presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke continues to struggle to gain any sort of traction for his campaign. With some polls putting him in 10th place, and his average sitting around 7th, some might say that it is desperation ...

Tell Your Lawmakers: No Semi-Auto and Magazine Ban!

News  

Sunday, September 15, 2019

Tell Your Lawmakers: No Semi-Auto and Magazine Ban!

The Democrat Party is now so aligned with gun control that every major candidate running for its 2020 presidential nomination recently appeared in a propaganda video produced by one of the nation’s most active firearm prohibition groups. ...

NASCAR Takes a Hard Left

News  

Friday, August 30, 2019

NASCAR Takes a Hard Left

After decades of NASCAR drivers literally turning left for hours every race day (road course races excluded, of course), the governing body appears to be taking a figurative left turn, politically. K-Var, a retailer in outdoor and ...

House Democrats Continue Unprecedented Push for More Gun Control

News  

Sunday, September 15, 2019

House Democrats Continue Unprecedented Push for More Gun Control

As was continually threatened while Congress was on its six-week Summer break, House Democrats hastily convened a hearing on Tuesday to promote their latest batch of anti-gun bills.  The House Judiciary Committee’s markup of three bills, ...

Playing Games with Numbers

News  

Sunday, September 15, 2019

Playing Games with Numbers

Stanford Law Professor John Donohue and Theodora Boulouta, a Stanford undergrad, wrote an opinion piece in the New York Times that claims their new research shows the 1994 “assault weapons” ban really did work.  Their finding is ...

NRA Files Suit Against San Francisco for Violating First Amendment

News  

Sunday, September 15, 2019

NRA Files Suit Against San Francisco for Violating First Amendment

On September 3, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors smeared millions of law-abiding Americans by unanimously adopting a resolution that designated NRA a “domestic terrorist organization.” Less than one week later, on September 9, NRA filed a federal lawsuit ...

San Francisco Board of Supervisors Declares NRA a “Domestic Terrorist Organization”

News  

Sunday, September 8, 2019

San Francisco Board of Supervisors Declares NRA a “Domestic Terrorist Organization”

On September 3, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously passed a resolution, “declaring that the National Rifle Association is a domestic terrorist organization and urging other cities, states, and the federal government to do the same.”The resolution was ...

California: 2019 Legislative Session Adjourns

Sunday, September 15, 2019

California: 2019 Legislative Session Adjourns

The California Legislature has adjourned the 2019 session resulting in the final passage of AB 12, AB 61, AB 879, AB 893, AB 1254, AB 1297, AB 1669, SB 61 and SB 172 which are now eligible ...

News  

Friday, September 13, 2019

NRA Statement on Texas Governor's Safety Action Report

The National Rifle Association released the following statement on Friday regarding Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's Texas Safety Action Report:   

“Pro-gun” Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick Turns on Second Amendment Supporters, Sides With Anti-Gun Lobby

News  

Sunday, September 8, 2019

“Pro-gun” Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick Turns on Second Amendment Supporters, Sides With Anti-Gun Lobby

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick uses his political website to claim he is “leading the fight for life and liberty in Texas, including … standing up for the Second Amendment.” He also proudly notes his prior NRA endorsement. But ...

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.