Court sanctions lawyer for guy who tried to sue gun manufacturer

skidmark · Nov 27, 2012

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2012/11/court_slaps_san.php

There is a link to a scanned 32-page .pdf file http://www.nssf.org/share/PDF/Ellis v Beemiller 2012.pdf so if you are on DSL or dial-up go get a cup of coffee or a Mountain Dew while you wait.

Basic story - lawyer stepped on his crank for even submitting the lawsuit when there was every reason to believe there was nothing truthful in it (except the client wanted money).

Take-away? Even if you are rabidly anti-gun, do not step on your crank like this.

Down side? Lawyer will not be anle to go after the client to make up for losses. (Where is that "my heart bleeds for you" emoticon when you really need it?)

BTW - if you are not reading David Hardy every day, you need to start doing so.

stay safe.

davidmcbeth · Nov 27, 2012

Tried the linky ... error.

I assume it was like Picard "A formal reprimand will appear on your permanent record Lieutenant"

skidmark · Nov 27, 2012

davidmcbeth said:
Tried the linky ... error.

I assume it was like Picard "A formal reprimand will appear on your permanent record Lieutenant"

Would it be asking too much to know which link is suppoed to have not worked and what sort of error message you received?

Or, of course, you could have read the link and figured out the source and gotten linked from there.

No, this is more than a formal reprimand on his permanent record. There will be both costs to be reimbursed to the defendants and some punitive fines. The court may also require not only this attorney but all attorneys in his firm (since they share the blame - even if they never heard of the case) to demonstrate substantial liklihood of prevailing before any future filings are accepted (no more "we have a case" but now "our case is as open & shut as you can get before it goes to trial").

stay safe.

SFCRetired · Nov 27, 2012

Both links worked for me. And I ain't the mostest technowhatchumacallit on this forum!!

In the Army, we used to call situations similar to that lawyer's as "being in deep, deep kimchee!" Also as stepping on an extraneous portion of the male anatomy with golf spikes on.

I strongly suspect that, in the foreseeable future, we will see many more cases like this one in the lower courts. What the appellate and Supreme Court levels do is still up for grabs.

skidmark · Nov 27, 2012

SFCRetired said:
....

I strongly suspect that, in the foreseeable future, we will see many more cases like this one in the lower courts. What the appellate and Supreme Court levels do is still up for grabs.

The Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act was supposed to protect manufacturers and distributors from most of these sorts of suits, which are pure harassment because someone else's pockets are always deeper.

This case, besides the now painfully obvious lack of merit, has suggestions of both client perjury and attorney barratry. I'm thinking the defendants will not persue either of them beyond what the judge has already imposed if only because of the difficulty in getting a prosecutor to care enough to bring charges.

There is another guy in New York State who has somehow managed to get past the Lawful Commerce act and has a case pending. If it does not get quashed at trial (and it looks like the judge will not do that) then we will see how far up the food chain they have to go to have someone say the plaintiff's attorney also stepped on his crank.

stay safe.

KYGlockster · Nov 28, 2012

skidmark said:
The Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act was supposed to protect manufacturers and distributors from most of these sorts of suits, which are pure harassment because someone else's pockets are always deeper.

This case, besides the now painfully obvious lack of merit, has suggestions of both client perjury and attorney barratry. I'm thinking the defendants will not persue either of them beyond what the judge has already imposed if only because of the difficulty in getting a prosecutor to care enough to bring charges.

There is another guy in New York State who has somehow managed to get past the Lawful Commerce act and has a case pending. If it does not get quashed at trial (and it looks like the judge will not do that) then we will see how far up the food chain they have to go to have someone say the plaintiff's attorney also stepped on his crank.

stay safe.

Do you have a good link to a story concerning the case that has worked around the Lawful Commerce act? Link to any deposistions, if any?

skidmark · Nov 28, 2012

KYGlockster said:
Do you have a good link to a story concerning the case that has worked around the Lawful Commerce act? Link to any deposistions, if any?

Start here http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/new-york-shooting-victim-can-sue-gun-man-87990/ . I have not seen anything but the initial filing, and am still astounded that the caase was allowed to advance based on the theory presented for getting around the basic intent of the law.

stay safe.

SFCRetired · Nov 28, 2012

It appears, from what I've read, that the Brady Bunch is pushing the New York case. I would also strongly suspect that a certain multi-billionaire mayor is encouraging the judges behind the scenes.

The question is how far up the chain it will have to go before a judge with both knowledge of the law and a healthy dose of common sense squashes this thing?

I also noticed the emotional appeal, "Saturday Night Special", used in the story. I wonder when people are going to wake up, recognize these hysterical emotional appeals for what they are, and start researching and thinking for themselves.

Do you ever get the deep-down feeling that a majority of our fellow citizens are, at best, intellectually lazy?

Freedom1Man · Dec 2, 2012

SFCRetired said:
Do you ever get the deep-down feeling that a majority of our fellow citizens are, at best, intellectually lazy?

That is the nicest way to say that.
I was thinking something much more rudely put.

I would have called many of those living in this country intellectual idiots. One person I was talking to could not understand basic logic and reasoning. She said that her feelings on subjects should be all that mattered, logical reasoning is not needed.

"I feel that more people with guns would make the country more unsafe."
"What causes you to feel that way?"
"I just feel that way."

Court sanctions lawyer for guy who tried to sue gun manufacturer

skidmark

Campaign Veteran

davidmcbeth

Banned

skidmark

Campaign Veteran

SFCRetired

Regular Member

skidmark

Campaign Veteran

KYGlockster

Activist Member

skidmark

Campaign Veteran

SFCRetired

Regular Member

Freedom1Man

Regular Member