Re: Prison Strike in Georgia
Posted: Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:17 pm
The NAACP and The City of New Orleans both filed separate class-action lawsuits after Mr Fox did, essentially they saw his mega-success and band-wagon-ed.
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/decline/blamegun.htm
But as I said before, it didn't matter that the Gun companies were proven liable, because they later had Congress grant them Immunity from lawsuits. Which was a terrible blow to justice.
The Fox case jury found a dozen gun makers guilty of negligent distribution. The
shooter's gun was never found. Unable to determine which company made the gun
that fired the bullet into Fox's head, the jury ordered all the makers of .25
caliber weapons in the case to pony up $5 million for Fox's care and pain.
Fox's victory burst the dam. Several hundred lawyers - including the Costanza
group, the combine of firms that mangled the tobacco industry - filed suits to
make sure the gun industry feels our pain.
New Orleans was the first of thirty cities in court demanding that gun purveyors pay
the cost of gathering the wounded off the streets, and the cost of arming the municipal police force in
self-defense. The legal profession might have finally accomplished what a
cowering Congress dare not consider: shutting down firearms sales at source.
The NAACP weighed in with a massive class-action suit on behalf of thousands of
the wounded and dead, based on yet another theory: product liability. I spoke to
one of their counsel, Mike Hausfeld, just after he returned from beating Hitler
in a US courtroom.
http://bushstole04.com/bushfascism/lawy ... _money.htm <---I couldn't find the original Article, but I know for a fact that Greg Palast did write it.Of those three shootings, the panel awarded damages in just one case- giving the survivor, Steven Fox, 19, of Queens, $4.95 million and his mother, Gail Fox, $50,000.
Yet the Foxes can actually collect just $500,000 and $7500, respectively, because the jury assigned just 13 percent of the damages to the defendants.
"It was an incredible victory," said plaintiffs lawyer Elisa Barnes. "We held 15 of the 25 liable for negligence."
But defence lawyers also claimed victory. "There's definitely no rhyme or reason to this jury's verdict,"said attorney John Renzulli, who represented Glock and 13 other gun makers.
Defence lawyers said they would file motions to have the verdict thrown out. "It's a classic split-the-baby verdict," said Brooklyn Law School Professor David Yassky. "The negligence (finding) is clearly bad for the gun companies."
The Brooklyn case was the first of its kind ever to go to trial and was viewed as a test for similar suits recently filed across the nation.
The jury of nine women and two men wrangled for five days sending out notes indicating it was deadlocked.
One startling note said 10 jurors were working together, but that one juror refused because he or she believed the verdict "will open the floodgate lawsuits across the country".
"Some didn't like guns and some did. That's why it took so long," said an unidentified male juror.
Brooklyn Federal Judge Jack Weinstein told the jurors to decide the case based on the evidence and not to consider outside implications.
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/decline/blamegun.htm
But as I said before, it didn't matter that the Gun companies were proven liable, because they later had Congress grant them Immunity from lawsuits. Which was a terrible blow to justice.