Another Idiotic Ruling from Our Friends in Cook County

[Munro Williams]

Judge Rules Lawsuit Against Gunmakers Can Proceed

from The Chigago Tribune

By Rick Hepp
Tribune Staff Writer
February 14, 2001

While saying that various gun manufacturers were not negligent in the deaths of slain Chicago Police Officer Michael Ceriale and four other gunshot victims, a Cook County Circuit Court judge today ruled that the manufacturers could be held liable under public nuisance laws.

Judge Jennifer Duncan-Brice ruled that the families of Ceriale and the other victims who were fatally shot in Chicago by offenders using handguns could proceed with their lawsuit alleging that gun makers, distributors and dealers created a public nuisance by designing and marketing handguns that appeal to gang members.

Ceriale was killed by gunfire in 1998 while on a predawn stakeout outside a housing project where prosecutors say the Gangster Disciples street gang was selling drugs. The trial of Jonathan Tolliver, 19, charged with first-degree murder in the Ceriale case, ended in a mistrial with a hung jury last week.

The families of Ceriale, Andrew Young and Salada Smith filed the lawsuit in 1999. Since then, the families of Miguel Macias and Willie Lee Lomax III have joined the suit. The families are asking an unspecified amount of damages from the gun industry as well as marketing restrictions on gun companies.

In an 18-page opinion, Duncan-Brice rejected the argument by lawyers for the gun industry that only those manufacturers whose guns were used in the shootings were liable. Comments from gun industry lawyers were not immediately available.

Jonathan Baum, an attorney for the victims, said the judge turned down the gun industry's argument that there has to be a "direct link" between the manufacturer and the death of the victim to prove negligence.

"The question is not whether it's their gun, it's whether it's their nuisance," Baum said. "Are they contributing to the flood (of illegal guns into Chicago)? It's the flood that's the nuisance, not the particular handgun."

Baum said the lawsuit argues that there is a "juvenile arms race . . . that's inspiring fear and dread on the streets . . . and that all of these defendants are contributing to it even if it wasn't their particular gun."

Duncan-Brice gave the gun industry permission to take her ruling immediately to the Illinois Appellate Court, which is weighing a similar case brought by the City of Chicago. The city's lawsuit against the industry was thrown out and is now on appeal.

James Door, who represents the manufacturers, said he was "optimistic and confident" that the appellate court would overturn today's ruling, which he called "contrary to Illinois law."

"Courts around the country are consistently saying there is no basis to bring a nuisance suit," Door said, noting that nine of 13 lawsuits suits brought against the gun industry have been dismissed in the past two years.


There they go again...

:barf:

 

[TheBluesMan]

If they allow this, cars will be next...

Our only hope in so many of these cases is the courts. Do you know which judge you voted for last election?

 

[Don Gwinn]

"It's not the gun, it's the flood...."

In other words, the bar was too high. In order to lower it, we'll switch from objective standards (is the gun dangerously defective in some way?) to subjective ones (is there a "flood" of illegal handguns and did the "flood" happen because of their marketing?) so we can change the standards around to crucify whoever we don't like.

 

[AnotherPundit]

I almost hope this goes to the Supreme Court. .because I actually still have faith in the Supremes, and maybe this could give them a chance to verify the 2nd.

anyway, meanwhile, I recommend civil disobedience in cases like this. Have to, there's just no other logical option.

 

[Jeff White]

this is just another example of how we are dividing along urban vs rural lines. You don't hear much of decisions like this coming from courts out in the country.

This is just another reason we should scream for tort reform. What happened to common sense? I guess that's not in the law anywhere.....

Jeff

 

[Monkeyleg]

"The trial of Jonathan Tolliver, 19, charged with first-degree murder in the Ceriale case, ended in a mistrial with a hung jury last week. "

We, the jury, cannot unanimously agree on the guilt or innocence of Mr. Tolliver. We do, however, find his gun guilty of murder in the first degree. We also find his pants, which housed said gun, guilty of murder in the first degree. Further, we find his shoes, which accompanied him to the scene of the crime, guilty of murder in the first degree. And we find the deceased, Mr. Ceriale, by reason of his presence at the scene of the crime to be an accomplice to the crime of murder in the first degree.

Dick

 

[Munro Williams]

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, my client should be acquitted because he only moved the index finger of his right hand. Surely his presence in this court is an outrage! This is an affront to justice!

 

[Bam Bam]

This is truly stupid. Moral responsibility has been removed from the autonomous moral agent and set (wrongly) on a group of that neither advocates nor encourages breaking the law nor murder. It is too stupid. Did I go to sleep and wake up in Bizarro World?