NCJ Number
182001
Journal
ABA Journal Volume: 86 Dated: March 2000 Pages: 48-52
Date Published
March 2000
Length
5 pages
Annotation
Municipalities are targeting gun manufacturers in lawsuits based on public nuisance theories, but they are learning that weapons suits are different from tobacco litigation.
Abstract
Nearly two decades after the gun was made that killed Chicago police officer Michael Ceriale, an Illinois judge ruled that Ceriale's family and the families of two other victims of handgun violence could sue Smith and Wesson and 19 other manufacturers, distributors, and retailers. In the Nation's latest litigation craze, "Ceriale" and a handful of other individual cases join 29 suits brought against the firearms industry since late 1998 by cities and counties. Gun control advocates have compared these actions to State suits against the tobacco industry; however, despite the Chicago win, the plaintiffs' have not fared well lately. The plaintiffs in "Ceriale" relied on an untested public nuisance theory. They alleged that the defendants' suburban marketing strategy targeted and saturated an underground market where criminals freely buy and sell handguns. It is illegal to sell handguns to private individuals inside city limits. Similar theories have failed in other court tests. State judges in Miami and in Bridgeport, Conn., denied both cities standing in their cases against gun makers. Essentially, they held that State gun laws pre-empt their claims and that the municipalities are at best only indirect victims of gun violence. The rulings came shortly after an Ohio judge's similar dismissal in October of a gun suit filed by the city of Cincinnati. Still, the threat of lawsuits has led gun industry representatives to negotiate with cities on matters of gun safety, including tighter control on dealers and locking devices that allow a weapon to be fired only by its owner.