LegalReader.com  ·  Legal News, Analysis, & Commentary

Lawsuits & Litigation

Sandy Hook Lawsuit Moves to State Court in Wake of another School Shooting


— October 2, 2015

The lawsuit was initially filed in Connecticut Superior Court in Bridgeport; however Bushmaster successfully petitioned for the case to be moved to federal court shortly afterward. The plaintiffs are arguing the Bushmaster AR-15 assault rifle used in the shooting is too dangerous to be sold to the public, citing negligent entrustment, a provision which holds a company liable for damages occurring to a third party. Federal courts have usually ruled in favor of gun manufacturers in cases involving negligent entrustment. Although Bushmaster attorneys argued that including Riverview Gun Sales in the lawsuit was “meritless” and that the company was fraudulently named as a defendant in order to keep the case at the state level, Judge Chatigny remanded the case back to state court without issuing an opinion.


With Thursday’s tragic mass shooting at Umpqua Community College in Rosenburg, Oregon, the issue of guns and gun control has made its periodic entry into the national consciousness. Although the repeated tragic incidents give a temporary rise to the idea of restricting assault weapons, with politicians and advocates issuing a national call for gun control, firearms enthusiasts and the National Rifle Association (NRA) have generally been able to brush off the “call to un-arms” until the next occurrence. One of the most psychologically devastating incidents was the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre from December 14th, 2012 that left 20 first-grade children and six adults dead. In a piece of sad irony, although a small victory for the families of 10 victims of the Newtown, Connecticut shooting, Hartford U.S. District Judge Robert Chatigny returned the wrongful death lawsuit filed by the families against rifle manufacturer Bushmaster back to state court on Wednesday. The decision is a win in terms that if the case ends up in the hands of a jury, that jury will consist of Connecticut residents, likely sympathetic to the victims.

Families of nine of the deceased children and one surviving teacher sued Bushmaster in 2014, also naming as defendants Massachusetts-based firearms distributor Camfour, and the East Windsor, Connecticut shop, Riverview Gun Sales, where shooter Adam Lanza’s mother legally purchased the rifle in 2010. The lawsuit was initially filed in Connecticut Superior Court in Bridgeport; however Bushmaster successfully petitioned for the case to be moved to federal court shortly afterward. The plaintiffs are arguing the Bushmaster AR-15 assault rifle used in the shooting is too dangerous to be sold to the public, citing negligent entrustment, a provision which holds a company liable for damages occurring to a third party. Federal courts have usually ruled in favor of gun manufacturers in cases involving negligent entrustment. Although Bushmaster attorneys argued that including Riverview Gun Sales in the lawsuit was “meritless” and that the company was fraudulently named as a defendant in order to keep the case at the state level, Judge Chatigny remanded the case back to state court without issuing an opinion. The decision to remand the case cannot be appealed.

Plaintiffs’ attorney Joshua Koskoff rejoiced in the ruling, calling it a “major setback” for gun manufacturers who do not want detailed discovery into their marketing strategies. Koskoff added that he thought it was the correct ruling, saying “We have consistently maintained that the underpininigs of our legal case are sound, and that the case belongs in state court where it can be evaluated by a Connecticut jury. The ultimate sale of this assault weapon occurred in the state of Connecticut, and it was used in an assault at a Connecticut school. My clients are now one important step closer to having their day in court.” Also providing legal counsel for the families is Katie Mesner-Hage, who defended Riverview’s inclusion in the suit, saying “The AR-15 assault rifle was designed as a military weapon. The defendants chose to make that weapon available to Connecticut citizens and to market it in explicitly militaristic terms — even in the wake of Columbine, Aurora and countless other tragedies.” Much like in the aftermath of the Oregon tragedy, NRA has remained silent in response to Judge Chatigny’s decision, instead focusing its social media efforts on public outcry regarding Missoula, Montana city council’s decision to ban gun sales, coverage of the World Shooting Championships in West Virginia, and a link to an animated “Eddie the Eagle” gun safety lesson page; complete with a coloring kit.

 

Sources:

CT Post (Bridgeport) – Daniel Tepfer and Nelson Oliveira

The Hartford Courant – Dave Altimari

PRN Newswire (Press Release) – Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder

Join the conversation!