« Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week | Main | Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit decides one Indiana case today »

Monday, October 01, 2007

Ind. Decisions - "Gary gun liability case in court today"

Patrick Guinane of the NWI Times reports today:

The Indiana Court of Appeals will hear arguments this morning in the city of Gary's eight-year battle to hold gunmakers responsible for violence wrought by their products.

Gary, led by then-Mayor Scott King, was among dozens of U.S. cities to file lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and gun dealers in the late 1990s.

The city launched the suit after an undercover investigation in which police officers claiming to be convicted felons were allowed to purchase numerous handguns and ammunition. Gary's suit accused gunmakers of negligently designing and distributing their products and creating a public nuisance in Gary by failing to prevent criminals from obtaining and misusing handguns.

A Lake County judge dismissed the case in 2001. The state Court of Appeals reinstated the nuisance claim a year later, but ultimately ruled against the city. Gary found a more receptive audience with the Indiana Supreme Court, which in 2003 ruled the lawsuit could proceed.

Then the legislative branch got involved. In 2005, Congress approved and President Bush signed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which shields firearm dealers and manufacturers from being held liable for crimes committed with their products.

A Lake County judge subsequently ruled the new federal law wiped out Gary's claim, but declared the law itself unconstitutional, ruling it infringed on due process rights, violated the separation of powers clause and unfairly applied retroactively.

"That's the only judge in the nation, so far, that has ruled in a case where the (new law) was asserted," said Lawrence Keane, a spokesman for the firearms industry. "Other courts that have adjudicated motions to dismiss, etc., have all concluded that the act is a constitutional exercise of power under the commerce clause by Congress. And we would, of course, agree with that."

[For more, scroll down to the next ILB entry.]

Posted by Marcia Oddi on October 1, 2007 08:05 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions