• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Shame on the Brady Center but Congrats to the Judge who recognized what was going on.

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
The Brady Center encouraged the parents of a victim in the 2012 Aurora theatre shootings to sue Lucky Gunner for the sale of the ammunition to the mentally deranged man who committed the horrific crime. That suit was dismissed by a judge who ruled, “It is apparent that this case was filed to pursue the political agenda of the Brady Center,” which shamelessly left the grieving parents with more than $200,000 in legal expenses.

This was not the first time that the Brady Center unsuccessfully attempted to challenge the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which passed Congress in 2005 with broad bipartisan support to prevent firearms manufacturers and retailers from being held liable for crimes committed with their products.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
There may have been a contingency option in play for the grieving parents.. Meaning they only pay attorney fees if they win the case..

Good ruling by the judge..

Solus, good to see you back!

My .02
Regards
CCJ
 

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
654
Location
Lynchburg
There may have been a contingency option in play for the grieving parents.. Meaning they only pay attorney fees if they win the case..

Good ruling by the judge..

Solus, good to see you back!

My .02
Regards
CCJ


Those contingency arrangements are to pay the legal fees for counsel on plaintiff's side. The judge awarded the $200K pursuant to a Colorado state law which in some cases permits defendant to request attorney fees from plaintiff.

So plaintiffs have to pay defendant's legal costs.

Nemo
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Those contingency arrangements are to pay the legal fees for counsel on plaintiff's side. The judge awarded the $200K pursuant to a Colorado state law which in some cases permits defendant to request attorney fees from plaintiff.

So plaintiffs have to pay defendant's legal costs.

Nemo

+1 and rightly so, cuts down on frivolous litigation.

My .02
CCJ
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Those contingency arrangements are to pay the legal fees for counsel on plaintiff's side. The judge awarded the $200K pursuant to a Colorado state law which in some cases permits defendant to request attorney fees from plaintiff.

So plaintiffs have to pay defendant's legal costs.

Nemo

+1 and rightly so, cuts down on frivolous litigation.

My .02
CCJ
The money comes right from the tax payers pocket.

Maybe they'll get tired of making such involuntary contributions and vote the bums out of office.
 

OC4me

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
750
Location
Northwest Kent County, Michigan
IMHO, the grieving parents are simply filing bankruptcy . . . all according to plan. The innocent party, Lucky Gunner, has to foot the crippling legal bill. I assure you this is the result hoped for by Bloomberg et al.

Pre-Planned Bankruptcies are done all the time. Brady's lawyers just added a new twist.

What is happening here is nothing more than the antis exploiting a clever end-run around the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which was passed to curb exactly this type of politically-motivated and frivolous litigation.
 
Last edited:

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
654
Location
Lynchburg
I am still not following you.

Private persons, pushed by anti-gun group files suit against gun and ammo dealer in court system of Colorado. Va statutes irrelevant. Gun/ammo dealer wins case on motions and under state statute gets fees/costs awarded to him from plaintiff.

State govt was not involved beyond operating the court system that caused the defendant to win and plaintiff to lose.

How do you figure taxpayers end up paying the costs?

Your citation the Va statutes is (IIRC) related to the corporation paying costs, not state govt or any other.

Your citation to the Appellate Strategist is related to elected officials. No elected official was involved in this case. No costs passed on to state for payment. It all comes from Plantiffs.

Nemo
 
Last edited:
Top