While a personal injury lawsuit aimed at gun manufacturers may on the surface seem likely to render a plaintiff’s victory, it’s not entirely clear if gun manufacturers can be sued. The first step for plaintiff’s attorneys, therefore, will be to argue that victims of the Parkland shooting can, in fact, sue the company whose product was involved in the deadly assault.

Can Gun Manufacturers be Sued by Victims?

That’s the question that needs to be answered by judges. The defendants are claiming that they have immunity from personal injury claims. If the court agrees with them, then the plaintiffs may be on the hook for paying the named defendants’ legal fees.

The decision could go either way. At the center is a statute passed in 2001 that ostensibly prohibits all civil actions against firearms manufacturers or distributors. But the wording is ambiguous. The law only states that the government is restricted from pursuing these actions. It does not explicitly state that victims are prohibited from bringing actions against manufacturers.

The law does, however, allow government or individual action against defective weapons. However, the same section goes on to say in Section 5(a): “…the potential of a firearm or ammunition to cause serious injury, damage, or death as a result of normal function does not constitute a defective condition of the product.”

In other words, the judges must decide if the original lawmakers made no mention of victims being able to pursue a legal action against a gun manufacturer because they wanted to leave that possibility open, or if the original intent of the law was to bar all liability suits against gun manufacturers that involved the normal functioning of a weapon.

Will the Case be Tossed?

While it’s pure speculation at this point, the law appears on the surface to protect gun manufacturers from liability in cases where their products are used for criminal activity. It’s is more likely that that is the spirit in which the law was written. It seems unlikely that the plaintiff’s motion to sue will survive summary judgment on the grounds of complicity.

Ironically, if the gun bought by the shooter backfired and thereby caused him injury, he would have better grounds to sue that the parents of the victims. This and other laws passed at the federal level, seek to insulate gun manufacturers from these kinds of tort cases.

Just because the case is tossed, however, doesn’t mean that the law that protects gun manufacturers is necessarily legal. Plaintiffs may be motivated to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court if they’re so inclined. At that point, a determination would need to be made that the law violates some constitutional statute and the case would be allowed to go forward.

Have You Suffered an Injury?

The attorneys at the office of Alan Goldfarb, P.A. Personal Injury Attorney of Miami handle a wide variety of personal injury cases. If you’ve been injured, give us a call at 305.371.3111 and we can get started on your case right away.

Resources:

sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/parkland/florida-school-shooting/fl-reg-florida-school-shooting-smith-wesson-lawsuit-20180523-story.html

leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.331.html

Florida Takata Consolidation

Though cases can be consolidated at both the federal and state level, many large-scale lawsuits are brought at the federal level. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure govern procedures for federal court filings and litigation. Rule 42 directly addresses consolidation, providing the parameters for when consolidation may be appropriate. Just because cases can be consolidated does not always mean that they will be consolidated. This, like much of litigation, is left up to the court’s discretion.

There are currently more than eighty cases that have been consolidated into a Federal Court in Florida for the pending Takata legislation. Though each individual in a large case such as this may have suffered different injuries of varying severity, the cases are consolidated to make it easier to obtain information. When a civil case is filed, the parties have an opportunity to make inquiries to the opposing side in a process called discovery. The process of discovery lets each side ask the other questions, request production of documents, and admit or deny admissions of fact. There is also an opportunity for each side to take the depositions of the other parties involved. Depositions are sworn oral statements that are used as a fact-finding tool in civil matters.

In a case where so many individuals were affected by wrongdoing such as an automotive product liability case, it is much easier and cost-effective to have the information asked for and relayed once, as opposed to separately for every single matter. The information can then be applied to all relevant parties.

Miami, Florida Product Liability Lawyers

Product liability litigation expands far beyond car manufacturing defects. Manufacturers, designers, distributors, and even retailers have an obligation to consumers to make products safe and usable. When a company fails to live up to this standard, the company may be held responsible for injury that is causes to its consumers. Regardless of whether you are involved in a large-scale lawsuit or one that caused individual injury, you may be entitled to legal compensation for your injuries. At Alan Goldfarb, P.A., we understand how emotional and financially burdensome it can be dealing with the aftermath of an injury. Our knowledgeable Miami product liability attorneys will assess every possible avenue for monetary recovery, whether it be through a consolidated lawsuit in federal court, or an individual lawsuit filed at the state level. Regardless of your unique circumstances, feel free to contact us to learn more about your legal rights.