Little-Acorn
Well-Known Member
Tort Reform would be nice. But tort reform one case at a time, works too.
I guess this means you can't sue Farberware next time someone stabs you with a knife, and can't sue Ford when someone runs over you with a car, too.
Aw, damn.
It's getting so that our courts will have to hear only the sensible cases that have actual issues at stake. What's the world coming to?
-----------------------------------------
http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayR...&STORY=/www/story/03-09-2009/0004985469&EDATE
Supreme Court Closes the Book on New York City's Lawsuit Against Gun Makers
Court Also Rejects DC/Lawson Case
NEWTOWN, Conn., March 9 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Putting an end to nine years of litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear New York City's request to continue a lawsuit that sought to hold firearms manufacturers responsible for the criminal misuse of firearms.
"We are very pleased by today's ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court to not review lower appellate court rulings that dismissed cases based on the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act," said Steve Sanetti, president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, trade association for the firearms industry. "These baseless lawsuits against responsible, law-abiding companies are the type that Congress intended to prevent by passing the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act."
The city's lawsuit was originally filed in 2000 by Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and was continued by Mayor Michael Bloomberg. After the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was passed by Congress in 2005, a federal judge threw out the New York lawsuit. Then in April of 2008, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision, saying the new law was constitutional.
New York's final recourse was to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, but today the court refused the case.
Among the companies sued were Beretta USA Corp., Smith & Wesson Holding Corp., Colt's Manufacturing Co. LLC, Sturm, Ruger & Co. and Glock GmbH.
Also today, the Supreme Court denied review of a similar case brought by the District of Columbia and individual residents of the district including Bryant Lawson against Beretta and other firearms manufacturers. These plaintiffs also hoped to have their case challenging the constitutionality of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act heard by the high-court's Justices.
"Today common sense and fairness prevailed," said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel.
I guess this means you can't sue Farberware next time someone stabs you with a knife, and can't sue Ford when someone runs over you with a car, too.
Aw, damn.
It's getting so that our courts will have to hear only the sensible cases that have actual issues at stake. What's the world coming to?
-----------------------------------------
http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayR...&STORY=/www/story/03-09-2009/0004985469&EDATE
Supreme Court Closes the Book on New York City's Lawsuit Against Gun Makers
Court Also Rejects DC/Lawson Case
NEWTOWN, Conn., March 9 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Putting an end to nine years of litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear New York City's request to continue a lawsuit that sought to hold firearms manufacturers responsible for the criminal misuse of firearms.
"We are very pleased by today's ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court to not review lower appellate court rulings that dismissed cases based on the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act," said Steve Sanetti, president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, trade association for the firearms industry. "These baseless lawsuits against responsible, law-abiding companies are the type that Congress intended to prevent by passing the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act."
The city's lawsuit was originally filed in 2000 by Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and was continued by Mayor Michael Bloomberg. After the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was passed by Congress in 2005, a federal judge threw out the New York lawsuit. Then in April of 2008, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision, saying the new law was constitutional.
New York's final recourse was to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, but today the court refused the case.
Among the companies sued were Beretta USA Corp., Smith & Wesson Holding Corp., Colt's Manufacturing Co. LLC, Sturm, Ruger & Co. and Glock GmbH.
Also today, the Supreme Court denied review of a similar case brought by the District of Columbia and individual residents of the district including Bryant Lawson against Beretta and other firearms manufacturers. These plaintiffs also hoped to have their case challenging the constitutionality of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act heard by the high-court's Justices.
"Today common sense and fairness prevailed," said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel.
