Teh One Who Knocks
12-16-2014, 12:19 PM
The Wall Street Journal
http://i.imgur.com/ZnK7ERz.jpg
Nine families of victims killed at Sandy Hook Elementary and one survivor filed a wrongful-death lawsuit Saturday against the manufacturer of the rifle used in the shooting in Newtown, Conn.
Adam Lanza shot and killed 20 school children and six staff members using a Bushmaster Model XM15-E2S rifle on Dec. 14, 2012. The rifle was lawfully purchased by Nancy Lanza, Mr. Lanza’s mother, according to law-enforcement officials.
The lawsuit, which has been reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, was hand-delivered to a Connecticut state marshal, according to a spokeswoman for the families. The marshal now has 30 days to serve the defendants named in the lawsuit. The lawsuit will be heard in Superior Court in Bridgeport, Conn.
The suit names as defendants Bushmaster Firearms International, which is owned by Remington Outdoor Co.; Camfour, a company that distributes Bushmaster products; and Riverview Gun Sales, a East Windsor, Conn., gun shop that sold the rifle to Ms. Lanza.
The lawsuit claims the gunmaker, the firearms distributor, and the store that sold firearm are liable for producing and selling a weapon unfit for civilian use.
“There is so much ample evidence of the inability of the civilian world to control these weapons, that is no longer reasonable to entrust them to for that purpose,” Joshua Koskoff, an attorney representing the families, said in an interview. “How many massacres do there have to be before for that is?”
Cerberus Capital Management, a private-investment firm that is the majority owner of Remington, said soon after the attack in Newtown that it intended to sell its stake in the company. A spokesman said the company hadn’t found a buyer. The spokesman referred comment on the lawsuit to Remington.
A spokesman for Remington said the company doesn’t “comment on matters related to litigation.”
Camfour and Riverview Gun Sales haven’t returned requests for comment.
In an article published in the Washington Times on June 14, 2013, George Kollitides, the chief executive of Remington Outdoor Company, was quoted as saying that Mr. Lanza alone, and not the rifle, was to blame for the killings.
“It’s very easy to blame an inanimate object,” Mr. Kollitides said. “Any kind of instrument in the wrong hands can be put to evil use. This comes down to intent - criminal behavior, accountability and responsibility.”
Plaintiffs include the families students of Dylan Hockley, Daniel Barden, Benjamin Wheeler, Noah Pozner and Jesse Lewis. Also included are the families of victims who worked at Sandy Hook: Victoria Soto, Lauren Rousseau, Rachel Marie D’Avino and Mary Sherlach. Natalie Hammond, a Sandy Hook teacher that was injured and survived the attack, is also a plaintiff.
Jillian Soto, the sister of Ms. Soto who died at Sandy Hook, said her family wanted to be a part of this lawsuit because they believed that civilians shouldn’t be allowed to own the rifle used in the shooting.
“We keep seeing this happen,” said Ms. Soto, 26 years. “We keeping seeing mass shootings at schools. And something has to be done.”
Carlos Soto, 17, a brother of Ms. Soto, said the lawsuit was another possible way to bring changes to the gun industry that couldn’t be achieved in Congress. “If nothing is going to change federally, we might as well try” in court, said Mr. Soto, 17.
Mr. Koskoff said the Bushmaster rifle used in the attack differed only slightly from the M-16, a military weapon that civilians couldn’t legally own. But in the military, strict institutional requirements exist for storing and using the weapon, he said. There is no comparable institutional oversight for civilians that can punish owners—say, for failing to secure their weapon, he said.
The federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, signed into law in 2005, shields gun manufacturers from most lawsuits. The basis for the Newtown suit stems from one exception under the law, so-called negligent entrustment lawsuits. Under such actions, one party can be held liable for entrusting a product to another party who then causes harm to a third-party.
Negligent entrustment lawsuits are commonly filed in incidents involving automobile accidents.
“Negligent entrustment is a tried-and-true by the book tort,” said Timothy Lytton, a professor at Albany Law School who has studied litigation against gun manufacturers.
A judge will have to decide whether entrustment includes a manufacturer putting a weapon into the stream of commerce that ends up in the hands of the customer, Mr. Lytton said. “Whether entrustment can encompass that idea depends on who is on the bench,” Mr. Lytton said.
Dennis Henigan, former director of the Legal Action Project at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said the lawsuit would test the limits of the negligent-entrustment legal theory.
“The issue in this case will be whether courts are willing to construe the doctrine of negligent entrustment so broadly as to encompass a theory of liability that is based on the sale of a particular gun to the general public instead of to a potentially particular dangerous individual,” Mr. Henigan said.
http://i.imgur.com/ZnK7ERz.jpg
Nine families of victims killed at Sandy Hook Elementary and one survivor filed a wrongful-death lawsuit Saturday against the manufacturer of the rifle used in the shooting in Newtown, Conn.
Adam Lanza shot and killed 20 school children and six staff members using a Bushmaster Model XM15-E2S rifle on Dec. 14, 2012. The rifle was lawfully purchased by Nancy Lanza, Mr. Lanza’s mother, according to law-enforcement officials.
The lawsuit, which has been reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, was hand-delivered to a Connecticut state marshal, according to a spokeswoman for the families. The marshal now has 30 days to serve the defendants named in the lawsuit. The lawsuit will be heard in Superior Court in Bridgeport, Conn.
The suit names as defendants Bushmaster Firearms International, which is owned by Remington Outdoor Co.; Camfour, a company that distributes Bushmaster products; and Riverview Gun Sales, a East Windsor, Conn., gun shop that sold the rifle to Ms. Lanza.
The lawsuit claims the gunmaker, the firearms distributor, and the store that sold firearm are liable for producing and selling a weapon unfit for civilian use.
“There is so much ample evidence of the inability of the civilian world to control these weapons, that is no longer reasonable to entrust them to for that purpose,” Joshua Koskoff, an attorney representing the families, said in an interview. “How many massacres do there have to be before for that is?”
Cerberus Capital Management, a private-investment firm that is the majority owner of Remington, said soon after the attack in Newtown that it intended to sell its stake in the company. A spokesman said the company hadn’t found a buyer. The spokesman referred comment on the lawsuit to Remington.
A spokesman for Remington said the company doesn’t “comment on matters related to litigation.”
Camfour and Riverview Gun Sales haven’t returned requests for comment.
In an article published in the Washington Times on June 14, 2013, George Kollitides, the chief executive of Remington Outdoor Company, was quoted as saying that Mr. Lanza alone, and not the rifle, was to blame for the killings.
“It’s very easy to blame an inanimate object,” Mr. Kollitides said. “Any kind of instrument in the wrong hands can be put to evil use. This comes down to intent - criminal behavior, accountability and responsibility.”
Plaintiffs include the families students of Dylan Hockley, Daniel Barden, Benjamin Wheeler, Noah Pozner and Jesse Lewis. Also included are the families of victims who worked at Sandy Hook: Victoria Soto, Lauren Rousseau, Rachel Marie D’Avino and Mary Sherlach. Natalie Hammond, a Sandy Hook teacher that was injured and survived the attack, is also a plaintiff.
Jillian Soto, the sister of Ms. Soto who died at Sandy Hook, said her family wanted to be a part of this lawsuit because they believed that civilians shouldn’t be allowed to own the rifle used in the shooting.
“We keep seeing this happen,” said Ms. Soto, 26 years. “We keeping seeing mass shootings at schools. And something has to be done.”
Carlos Soto, 17, a brother of Ms. Soto, said the lawsuit was another possible way to bring changes to the gun industry that couldn’t be achieved in Congress. “If nothing is going to change federally, we might as well try” in court, said Mr. Soto, 17.
Mr. Koskoff said the Bushmaster rifle used in the attack differed only slightly from the M-16, a military weapon that civilians couldn’t legally own. But in the military, strict institutional requirements exist for storing and using the weapon, he said. There is no comparable institutional oversight for civilians that can punish owners—say, for failing to secure their weapon, he said.
The federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, signed into law in 2005, shields gun manufacturers from most lawsuits. The basis for the Newtown suit stems from one exception under the law, so-called negligent entrustment lawsuits. Under such actions, one party can be held liable for entrusting a product to another party who then causes harm to a third-party.
Negligent entrustment lawsuits are commonly filed in incidents involving automobile accidents.
“Negligent entrustment is a tried-and-true by the book tort,” said Timothy Lytton, a professor at Albany Law School who has studied litigation against gun manufacturers.
A judge will have to decide whether entrustment includes a manufacturer putting a weapon into the stream of commerce that ends up in the hands of the customer, Mr. Lytton said. “Whether entrustment can encompass that idea depends on who is on the bench,” Mr. Lytton said.
Dennis Henigan, former director of the Legal Action Project at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said the lawsuit would test the limits of the negligent-entrustment legal theory.
“The issue in this case will be whether courts are willing to construe the doctrine of negligent entrustment so broadly as to encompass a theory of liability that is based on the sale of a particular gun to the general public instead of to a potentially particular dangerous individual,” Mr. Henigan said.