OT - Appeals Dismisses NY Suit -vs- Gun Industries

don Tomás · Post by **don Tomás** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 2:31 pm

Sure seems like we've been getting favorable decisions in a lot of these things...
Tom

U.S. Federal Appeals Court Dismisses NY Suit vs. Gun Industry

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A U.S. federal appeals court on Wednesday dismissed a lawsuit filed by New York City against gun makers and suppliers the city targeted in a bid to stop the flow of illegal weapons.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the city's claims against the manufacturers and wholesale sellers of firearms, saying a federal law granted them immunity.

The decision overturns a lower court ruling.

The gun manufacturers had appealed a decision by federal Judge Jack Weinstein, who ruled the courts had jurisdiction to hear the lawsuits.

The city claimed firearms makers and suppliers marketed guns to legitimate buyers knowing those guns would be end up in illegal markets.

The federal appeals court panel ruled that the gun suppliers had immunity under a federal law passed in 2005 that prevents firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable for crimes committed with their products.

The lawsuit, originally filed in 2000 under former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, sought no monetary damages but claimed suppliers marketed guns to legitimate buyers knowing they would then be used illegally.

The city argued suppliers should be ordered to more closely monitor the flow of firearms into illegal markets.

The lawsuit was amended in 2004 under Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who filed similar civil lawsuits against gun dealers in 2006. Many of those lawsuits have been settled.

O.S.O.K. · Post by **O.S.O.K.** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 2:37 pm

Yes, and the real problem is the cost of defending against these attacks.

I really am a strong believer in a "loser pays" litigation reform law.

That is to say, you can bring a suit against anybody you want but you must pay their legal fees if you do not prevail.

The system already allows for the plaintiff to recover legal fees if they do prevail, but the reverse is not usually sucessful and costs even more to pursue!

The system is just set up wrong right now - pure and simple.

handirifle · Post by **handirifle** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 4:17 pm

I agree 100% on that idea. Lots of attorneys would go broke, or take up honorable professions.

There are time, and people that deserve to be sued, but the attorney would be less likely to take on a case he didn't think he could win.

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:45 pm

Shhhh.... don't curse us - common sense may be breaking out all over the place!

Jaguarundi · Post by **Jaguarundi** » Thu May 01, 2008 2:35 am

don TomÃ¡s-that is good news and thanks posting.

I like the history recap on Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Rudolph Giuliani contribution.Both turkeys are NYC vote grabbers (and gungrabbers for sure).