Friday, March 15, 2019

New Excuses Why Judges Do Not Follow Laws

3/14/19 Reuters:
(Reuters) - Families of schoolchildren gunned down in the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre can sue Remington Outdoor Co Inc, a Connecticut court ruled on Thursday, in a setback for gun makers long shielded from liability in mass shootings.
In a 4-3 ruling widely expected to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, Connecticut's highest court found the lawsuit could proceed based on a state law protecting consumers against fraudulent marketing.
"The Connecticut Supreme Court has blown a very large hole into the federal immunity for firearms manufacturers in lawsuits alleging criminal misuse of the products they sell," said Timothy Lytton, a law professor at Georgia State University and author of a book on gun litigation.
No hole blown.  What is fraudulent marketing about the AR-15?  That is a gun and potentially lethal?  The federal law prohibiting suit of makers of firearms that work as intended and were not intentionally sold unlawfully is clear and the antigunners complained bitterly when it was passed because it prevented this sort of suit.  The courts held the grieving family liable for Lucky Gunner's legal fees after the Aurora mass murder?  At what point will this bringing of clearly wrong suits expopsing the plaintiffs to liability become a disbarrable matter.

1 comment:

  1. Any decent legal team should be able to adequately lay out a defense that Remington has only ever represented it's products being used lawfully and not for illicit purposes.

    On the other hand could a lawsuit be brought against all of the media, politicians, and anti gun pundits who repeatedly assert that the ONLY use for certain types of firearm is mass murder? If anyone is putting the idea in the minds of deranged individuals it is them.