« Update on Mike Vanderboegh's condition | Main | Bribery in the NYC pistol licensing department »
Thoughts on the Bushmaster Connecticut ruling
The media has been playing up the court's ruling allowing the Brady Campaign lawsuit against Bushmaster to proceed, notwithstanding the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. A look at the actual ruling rather than the news accounts shows the ruling is far less significant than the media claims.
It appears that Connecticut procedures allow a defendant to move to dismiss a case in different ways, including arguing (1) the plaintiff has no case, or (2) the court doesn't even have jurisdiction to decide whether plaintiff has a case. (It's not clear to me whether you can do both in the same motion, as you can with federal practice). Buahmaster's attorneys chose to argue (2): the PLCAA deprives a State court of jurisdiction to determine a case that the statute covers. And that's the argument that the court turned down. Assuming CT procedures permit this, Bushmaster can now proceed to argue that plaintiff doesn't have a case.
3 Comments | Leave a comment
Does the Judge speaking at the plaintiffs law firm create a conflict of interest?
https://www.cttriallawyers.org/events/event.cfm?EventID=2184
The Defendants will eventually win and the sorry-ass Plaintiffs will be on the hook for hundreds of thousands of dollars just like the Aurora Theater shooting lawsuit.
I'm not an attorney, just a legal hobbyist. Did Remington's council make a procedural error in making a pleading out of order?
Does this case possibly subject the plaintiffs to major costs and fees if they lose? At what point do the plaintiffs become responsible for defendants legal fees if plaintiffs lose the case?