Eastern District of Pennsylvania Recognizes Split in Authority Regarding Whether a Claim-By-Claim Analysis Under the PLCAA is Warranted
Posted: August 18, 2016 Filed under: Firearms Defense | Tags: Firearm Defense, firearms, Negligent Entrustment, Negligent Per Se, PLCAA, Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act Leave a comment
Today, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania addressed the proper interpretation of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and the exceptions contained therein. In Ramos v. Wal-Mart Stores, No. 516-cv-00304, District Judge Joseph Leeson specifically recognized a split in authority regarding whether a claim-by-claim analysis under the PLCAA is warranted. Judge Leeson focused on the Act’s use of the term “action” as opposed to “claim” when assessing whether a plaintiff only needs to meet one of the exceptions to the Act in order to avoid PLCAA immunity. While Judge Leeson did not reach a decision on the issue, his opinion identifies a split in authority and clearly invites future plaintiffs to argue that general negligence or nuisance claims can survive so long as any exception to the Act is met. Read the rest of this entry »
Second Circuit Upholds Constitutionality of NY and Connecticut’s Assault Weapons Bans
Posted: October 23, 2015 Filed under: Appeals, Firearms Defense | Tags: Appeals, Assault Weapons Ban, SAFE Act, Second Amendment, Second Circuit Leave a commentOn October 19, 2015, the Second Circuit issued an opinion regarding the constitutionality of the SAFE Act/Act Concerning Gun Violence Prevention legislation in New York and Connecticut, upholding the lower court’s decision that a seven round magazine limit was arbitrary but otherwise affirming the constitutionality of the legislation. Read the rest of this entry »
The Reach of the Communications Decency Act’s “Good Samaritan” Clause
Posted: March 27, 2015 Filed under: Commercial Litigation, Firearms Defense | Tags: Communications Decency Act, District of New Jersey, Federal Court, Good Samaritan Clause, Judge Simandle, Muzzleloader, Second Circuit Leave a commentTwo recent local cases, one from the Second Circuit and one from the District of New Jersey, serve as reminders regarding the reach of the “Good Samaritan” clause of the Communications Decency Act (“CDA”) and demonstrate that the CDA is a powerful defense against tort claims brought against operators of websites. Read the rest of this entry »
Alaska PLCAA Decision
Posted: April 17, 2013 Filed under: Firearms Defense | Tags: firearms, firearms defense, PLCAA, Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act Leave a commentThe Supreme Court of Alaska Upholds Constitutionality of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and Holds That Negligence Claims Arising From the Theft of a Firearm Do Not Meet an Enumerated Exception to the Act
On February 22, 2013, the Supreme Court of Alaska issued its decision in Estate of Kim v. Coxe, No. S-14077, 2013 Alas. LEXIS 18 (Alaska Feb. 22, 2013), which affirmed the constitutionality of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, 15 U.S.C. § 7901, et seq. (“PLCAA” or the “Act”) and held that the Act prohibits lawsuits against a manufacturer or seller based on general negligence theories. In fact, the Alaska Supreme Court specifically held that the theft of a firearm from a retailer “does not support liability under claims excepted from the PLCAA.”
Factual Background
On August 2, 2006, Jason Coday entered Defendant’s gun shop (Rayco Sales). All three persons present in Rayco that afternoon (owner Ray Coxe, employee Bill Driver, and customer Stan Buckham) testified that they did not notice any behavior from Coday to indicate danger or potential for violence. After Coday inquired about purchasing a .22 caliber rifle for target shooting, Coxe suggested a used Ruger rifle priced at $195. Coday ultimately stated that he would have to think about the purchase and appeared to be leaving the store. When Coxe left the store front, Coday then stole the rifle and left two $100 bills on the counter. Read the rest of this entry »
