Suit OK'd against firearms makers
Boston is only city to make it so far
Raja Mishra - Boston Globe
Friday, July 14, 2000
Boston --- Boston's $100 million lawsuit against the gun manufacturers cleared a major hurdle Thursday as a state judge refused the firearm industry's request to dismiss the case.
The decision makes the city's case the only one in the nation to survive challenges by gunmakers and legislatures. Similar lawsuits, which contend manufacturers bear some responsibility for the toll gun-related violence has taken on communities, have been dismissed in Cincinnati, Bridgeport, Conn. and Miami. Many of the counts in a suit by the city of Chicago were also dismissed. State lawmakers have blocked suits in Atlanta, New Orleans and Detroit. More than 20 others are still pending but have not progressed beyond the initial stage.
The Boston case now moves into the discovery phase, where gun executives can be questioned under oath and sensitive internal documents subpoenaed.
The suit names 31 gunmakers including Smith & Wesson, Harrington & Richardson Corp. and Savage Arms in Massachusetts, seven companies in Connecticut and one in New Hampshire.
In the coming months, city lawyers are expected to request documents from all of them regarding how guns are made, how they are marketed and what gunmakers know about gun smuggling and illegal sales. Discovery could last up to two years, and dozens of the industry's most prominent executives are expected to be deposed, said city lawyers.
Dramatic changes occurred in the tobacco industry after they were forced to turn over internal documents. Most of them came from a single case involving a lawsuit filed by the state of Mississippi. The result was a massive financial settlement with state governments and sweeping regulations of the industry.
The decision was released late Thursday and gun manufacturers could not be reached for comment.
The city's allegations have six prongs: gunmakers produce a product that is a public nuisance; they haven't taken reasonable steps to prevent illegal sales; they failed to incorporate safety devices on guns; they failed to warn gun buyers of risks; they have unjustly profited at the expense of the public; they were negligent in marketing, distributing and designing guns.
The judge dismissed the marketing part of the last count but upheld all the others.
The city is asking for $100 million, though that figure could climb as a trial approaches. The number is based on an estimate --- officials call it ''conservative'' --- of gun-related costs to local police, emergency medical services, fire departments, schools and hospitals.
They are also asking that gun companies to enact several internal reforms of gun design and marketing, launch a public campaign on the dangers of their product, and fund a city violence prevention program.
In the cases filed by other cities, judges weren't convinced that gun companies were responsible for any of the pain or damage caused by guns once they left the factory. The companies were too far removed from shootings --- the so-called ''remoteness'' doctrine. The individuals who fire guns are at fault, the judges typically reasoned in throwing out the cases.
But in Suffolk Superior Court Judge Margaret Hinkle's 41-page decision, she wrote: ''In sum, (the city's) allegations are not, as a matter of law, barred by 'remoteness.' '' She reasoned that if Boston as a whole is considered the victim, rather than a collection of individuals, then the business of gun making might be considered a public nuisance, like pollution.
> ON THE WEB: City of Boston: www.ci.boston.ma.us/
Second Amendment Foundation: www.saf.org/
NRA Joe's Second Amendment Discussion Forum
Boston is only city to make it so far
Raja Mishra - Boston Globe
Friday, July 14, 2000
Boston --- Boston's $100 million lawsuit against the gun manufacturers cleared a major hurdle Thursday as a state judge refused the firearm industry's request to dismiss the case.
The decision makes the city's case the only one in the nation to survive challenges by gunmakers and legislatures. Similar lawsuits, which contend manufacturers bear some responsibility for the toll gun-related violence has taken on communities, have been dismissed in Cincinnati, Bridgeport, Conn. and Miami. Many of the counts in a suit by the city of Chicago were also dismissed. State lawmakers have blocked suits in Atlanta, New Orleans and Detroit. More than 20 others are still pending but have not progressed beyond the initial stage.
The Boston case now moves into the discovery phase, where gun executives can be questioned under oath and sensitive internal documents subpoenaed.
The suit names 31 gunmakers including Smith & Wesson, Harrington & Richardson Corp. and Savage Arms in Massachusetts, seven companies in Connecticut and one in New Hampshire.
In the coming months, city lawyers are expected to request documents from all of them regarding how guns are made, how they are marketed and what gunmakers know about gun smuggling and illegal sales. Discovery could last up to two years, and dozens of the industry's most prominent executives are expected to be deposed, said city lawyers.
Dramatic changes occurred in the tobacco industry after they were forced to turn over internal documents. Most of them came from a single case involving a lawsuit filed by the state of Mississippi. The result was a massive financial settlement with state governments and sweeping regulations of the industry.
The decision was released late Thursday and gun manufacturers could not be reached for comment.
The city's allegations have six prongs: gunmakers produce a product that is a public nuisance; they haven't taken reasonable steps to prevent illegal sales; they failed to incorporate safety devices on guns; they failed to warn gun buyers of risks; they have unjustly profited at the expense of the public; they were negligent in marketing, distributing and designing guns.
The judge dismissed the marketing part of the last count but upheld all the others.
The city is asking for $100 million, though that figure could climb as a trial approaches. The number is based on an estimate --- officials call it ''conservative'' --- of gun-related costs to local police, emergency medical services, fire departments, schools and hospitals.
They are also asking that gun companies to enact several internal reforms of gun design and marketing, launch a public campaign on the dangers of their product, and fund a city violence prevention program.
In the cases filed by other cities, judges weren't convinced that gun companies were responsible for any of the pain or damage caused by guns once they left the factory. The companies were too far removed from shootings --- the so-called ''remoteness'' doctrine. The individuals who fire guns are at fault, the judges typically reasoned in throwing out the cases.
But in Suffolk Superior Court Judge Margaret Hinkle's 41-page decision, she wrote: ''In sum, (the city's) allegations are not, as a matter of law, barred by 'remoteness.' '' She reasoned that if Boston as a whole is considered the victim, rather than a collection of individuals, then the business of gun making might be considered a public nuisance, like pollution.
> ON THE WEB: City of Boston: www.ci.boston.ma.us/
Second Amendment Foundation: www.saf.org/
NRA Joe's Second Amendment Discussion Forum