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 |
|
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. |
|
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. |
|
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. ** |
More Like This From Around The NRA
