Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN News

test2222

Friday, November 15, 2002

PLAINTIFFS DATE, Court, CASE # DEFENDANTS ALLEGED CLAIMS LAWSUIT PREEMPTION? CASE STATUS Q = CASE CLOSED
New Orleans, LA 10/30/98Louisiana Supreme Court 2000-CA-1132 15 manufacturers and distributors, 5 dealers, 3 associations Defective design, negligent distribution YES - passed 4/99 State Supreme Court reversed lower court decision 4/3/01 and DISMISSED all claims. U.S. Supreme Court DENIED CERT. on 10/9/01. q
Chicago and Cook County, IL 11/12/98 amended 4/7/99 IL App. Ct. 1st Jud. Dist.00-3541 22 manufacturers and distributors, 12 dealers Negligent distribution,defective design, nuisance NO CONSOLIDATED & DISMISSED by trial court. 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.
State of Illinois 11/14/00 Cir. Ct. Cook County 00-CH-016394 4 manufacturers and 8 distributors Public nuisance NO Motion to dismiss filed on 1/29/01. Argument 1/10/02. DISMISSED.
Miami-Dade County, FL 1/27/99FL Supreme Ct.SC-01861 26 manufacturers and distributors, 3 associations, 2 dealers Defective design, deceptive advertising, negligent distribution YES -- SB 412 signed by Gov. Bush 5/1/01 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. q
Bridgeport, CT 1/27/99 amended 4/22/99CT Supreme CourtSC-16465 21 manufacturers and distributors, 12 dealers, 3 associations Negligent distribution, defective design, deceptive advertising, nuisance, conspiracy, unjust enrichment NO DISMISSED at trial 12/10/99, appealed 12/29/99, transferred to CT Supreme Court. Trial Court AFFIRMED on 10/9/01 q
Atlanta, GA 2/5/99Court of Appeals, GAA01A2521 14 manufacturers and distributors, 3 associations Defective and negligent design, conspiracy, negligent distribution YES - passed 2/99 DISMISSED 2/13/02 by Court of Appeals citing lawsuit preemption statute. No appeal to GA Sup. Court filed. q
Cleveland, OH 4/8/99US Dist. Ct. N. Dist. Of OH1:99-CK-1134 17 manufacturers and distributors, 3 associations Defective design, nuisance, unjust enrichment YES - HB 192 signed by Gov. 7/6/01. Motion to dismiss DENIED 3/14/00. No action taken since stay lifted 6/2002.
Detroit, MI(consolidated with Wayne County) 4/26/99MI Ct. of Appeals 24 manufacturers and distributors, 11 dealers Negligent distribution, nuisance YES - passed 6/2000 - On 3/30/01 court ruled the retroactive application of the statute was unconstitutional DISMISSED negligence claim, DENIED public nuisance claim DENIED lawsuit preemption statute claim 3/23/01. Defendants appealed. Argument heard 11/19/02.
Wayne County, MI(consolidated with Detroit) 4/26/99MI Ct. of Appeals 24 manufacturers and distributors, 11 dealers Negligent distribution, nuisance YES - passed 6/2000 - On 3/30/01 court ruled the retroactive application of the statute was unconstitutional DISMISSED negligence claim, DENIED public nuisance claim DENIED lawsuit preemption statute claim 3/23/01. Defendants appealed. Argument heard 11/19/02.
Cincinnati, OH 4/28/99Supreme Ct., OH00-1705 16 manufacturers and distributors, 3 associations Negligent distribution, defective design, deceptive advertising, nuisance YES - HB 192 signed by Gov. 7/6/01. 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. q
St. Louis, MO 4/30/99City of St. Louis Circuit Ct.992-01209 25 manufacturers and distributors, 2 dealers, 3 associations Negligent distribution, defective design, deceptive advertising, nuisance, conspiracy, unjust enrichment YES - SB 1 passed in 1999. Motion to dismiss was filed 10/5/00. Argument on motion to dismiss heard on 1/24/03.
CITIES OF NORTH CA Oakland, Berkeley, Sacramento, East Palo Alto, San Francisco, Alameda County, San Mateo County 5/25/99Case coordinated with cities below.Superior Court, San Diego.JCCP # 4095 28 manufacturers, 6 distributors and dealers, 3 associations Negligent distribution, nuisance, defective design, deceptive advertising, fraudulent business practices NO -- Product liability protection at CA. CIV. CODE § 1714.4 was repealed 9/25/02 Motion to dismiss DENIED 9/15/00. Manu. filed motion to preclude evidence on 6/28/02. Defendants filed motion for summary judgment 1/3/03 following close of discovery. DISMISSED in part on 3/7/03. Appeal has been filed.
CITIES OF SOUTH CA Los Angeles, Compton, West Hollywood, Inglewood 5/25/99Case coordinated with cities above.Superior Court, San Diego.JCCP # 4095 39 manufacturers, 5 distributors, 5 dealers, 3 associations Negligent distribution, nuisance, defective design, deceptive advertising, fraudulent business practices NO -- Product liability protection at CA. CIV. CODE § 1714.4 was repealed 9/25/02 Motion to dismiss DENIED 9/15/00. Manu. filed motion to preclude evidence on 6/28/02. Defendants filed motion for summary judgment 1/3/03 following close of discovery. DISMISSED in part on 3/7/03. Appeal has been filed
County of Los Angeles,CA 8/6/99Casecoordinatedwith cities above.JCCP # 4095 28 manufacturers, 6 distributors and dealers, 3 associations Negligent distribution, nuisance, defective design, deceptive advertising, fraudulent business practices NO -- Product liability protection at CA. CIV. CODE § 1714.4 was repealed 9/25/02 Motion to dismiss DENIED 9/15/00. Defendants filed motion to preclude evidence on 6/28/02. Defendants filed motion for summary judgment 1/3/03 following close of discovery. DISMISSED in part on 3/7/03. Appeal has been filed
Camden Co., NJ 6/2/1999 US Dist. Ct, Dist. Of New Jersey99-CV-2518 22 manufacturers Negligent distribution, defective design, assault and/or battery, economic interference NO 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. q
Boston, MA 6/3/99Superior Court, Suffolk County99-2590 29 manufacturers and distributors, 3 associations Negligent distribution, defective design, deceptive advertising, nuisance, unjust enrichment NO 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 to begin 9/24/02. The city dropped its suit 3/27/02. q
City of Newark, NJ 6/9/99Superior Ct. of NJ, Essex CountyESX-L-6059-99 28 manufacturers, 2 distributors, 2 associations Negligent distribution, defective design, deceptive advertising, nuisance, unjust enrichment NO DISMISSED products liability & unjust enrichment claims but DENIED dismissal of negligent marketing & distribution claim 12/11/01. Appealed. On 3/11/03 AFFIRMED but trade groups were dismissed.
City of Camden, NJ 6/21/99Superior Ct. of NJ, Camden CountyCAM-4510-99 19 manufacturers and 3 associations Negligent distribution, defective design, deceptive advertising, nuisance, unjust enrichment NO Oral argument on a motion to dismiss heard 2/22/01. DISMISSED 7/7/03.
City of Gary, IN 8/27/99Lake Superior Ct.45-D05-0005-CT-243 21 manufacturers & distributors, 3 assoc., 5 dealers Negligent distribution & marketing, negligence, nuisance YESEffective 4/18/2001 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. heard appeal 2/27/03.
City of Wilmington, DE 9/29/99Del. Superior Ct., New Castle County99-C-09-283 12 manufacturers, 3 associations Negligent distribution, marketing, design, inadequate warnings, nuisance, fraud, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy NO DISMISSED by Superior Court. A decision to not file an appeal was made on 12/26/02. q
Wash., D.C. 1/20/00DC Superior Ct., Civ. Div.00-000428 25 manufacturers and 4 distributors Negligent distribution, strict liability, public nuisance NO Oral argument on motion to dismiss heard 4/13/01. 12/16/02 case DISMISSED. Plaintiffs have filed an appeal.
City of Philadelphia 4/11/00Ct. of Common Pleas, Phila. County00-1442 14 manufacturers and distributors Negligent distribution, public nuisance YES - passed 12/99 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.q
City of New York 5/20/00US Dist. Ct., ED NY1:00-CV-3641 24 manufacturers and distributors, 3 trade associations Negligent distribution, public nuisance, deceptive advertising NO Defendants did not file a motion to dismiss. Discovery is ongoing at this time.* Stayed pending NY state case.
State of New York 6/26/00NY Superior Ct. NY County402586/00 25 manufacturers and distributors Negligent distribution, public nuisance NO DISMISSED 8/10/01 by trial court. Appealed. AG argued 5/10/02 to reinstate case. Appeals Court AFFIRMED trial court ruling 6/24/03.
Jersey City v. Smith & Wesson et al 3/28/02Sup. Ct. Of NJ, Hudson County. 12 manufacturers, 2 dealers, 3 trade associations Public nuisance NO Complaint filed on 3/28/02.
TRENDING NOW
FBI Releases Final Crime Report for 2025 to the Dismay of Firearm Prohibitionists

News  

Monday, August 24, 2026

FBI Releases Final Crime Report for 2025 to the Dismay of Firearm Prohibitionists

There has been a certain amount of anticipation while the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) analyzed the available crime data for last year. The speculation among many was that the report would be, not just ...

Questions and Answers About the Texas NFA Case

News  

Monday, August 17, 2026

Questions and Answers About the Texas NFA Case

On August 12, we reported on an important development in the ongoing litigation over the National Firearms Act (NFA) filed by multiple plaintiffs in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. These included, ...

SCOTUS Statutory Ruling Not the Final Word on Biden-Era “Frame or Receiver” Rule

News  

Monday, August 24, 2026

SCOTUS Statutory Ruling Not the Final Word on Biden-Era “Frame or Receiver” Rule

For years, NRA-ILA has closely followed and reported on the legal and regulatory saga surrounding the Biden-Harris administration’s so-called “Frame or Receiver” rule. 

DOJ Relaunches Federal Firearms Rights Restoration with New Final Rule

News  

Monday, August 24, 2026

DOJ Relaunches Federal Firearms Rights Restoration with New Final Rule

On August 20, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) published a final rule in the Federal Register that establishes application standards for those seeking relief from federal firearm disabilities under the Gun Control Act of ...

California: Anti-Gun Bills Pass the Legislature, Now Heading to the Governor's Desk

Wednesday, August 26, 2026

California: Anti-Gun Bills Pass the Legislature, Now Heading to the Governor's Desk

This week, three anti-gun bills received final passage from the legislature and will now be transmitted to the Governor's desk for his consideration. The most egregious among these measures is Senate Bill 948, which imposes ...

Federal Court Strikes Down NFA Registration Requirements for Suppressors, Short-Barreled Rifles, and Short-Barreled Shotguns in NRA Case

Wednesday, August 5, 2026

Federal Court Strikes Down NFA Registration Requirements for Suppressors, Short-Barreled Rifles, and Short-Barreled Shotguns in NRA Case

In another major victory for the National Rifle Association and law-abiding gun owners, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas today held that the National Firearms Act’s registration and approval requirements for ...

ATF Director Corrects Gun Control Advocates on Regulatory Reform

News  

Monday, August 17, 2026

ATF Director Corrects Gun Control Advocates on Regulatory Reform

In a stark departure from the last administration, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is taking gun control advocates to task for their sensationalist rhetoric and questionable legal claims. 

District Court Enters Final Judgment Striking Down New Mexico’s Waiting Period Law in NRA Victory

Friday, August 28, 2026

District Court Enters Final Judgment Striking Down New Mexico’s Waiting Period Law in NRA Victory

The U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico granted summary judgment holding New Mexico’s 7-day waiting period law unconstitutional in Ortega v. Grisham—a case brought by the National Rifle Association and Mountain States ...

What Does the Texas NFA Decision Mean for You?

News  

Wednesday, August 12, 2026

What Does the Texas NFA Decision Mean for You?

On August 5, 2026, Judge Wesley Hendrix of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas held that the National Firearms Act’s registration and approval requirements for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns ...

NRA Files Another Lawsuit Challenging the National Firearms Act

Thursday, October 9, 2025

NRA Files Another Lawsuit Challenging the National Firearms Act

Today, the National Rifle Association—along with the American Suppressor Association, Firearms Policy Coalition, and Second Amendment Foundation—announced the filing of another lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA).

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.