Has Judge Weinstein Flipped-Flopped On What This Case Is About?

One of the defendants sued by the NAACP is RSR Management (NAACP v AA Arms). In a related case, RSR Management asked Judge Jack B. Weinstein to decide whether its insurance company, Scottsdale Insurance, was required by the insurance policy to defend RSR against the NAACP’s lawsuit. Scottsdale had claimed it was only required to defend RSR if the NAACP was seeking money damages, which Scottsdale claimed was not the case.

In September of 2000 Judge Weinstein ruled that Scottsdale was obligated to defend RSR because, he wrote, “[the NAACP] seeks injunctive relief and monetary relief, including: contribution to a fund… [RSR] might be legally obligated to pay a sum of money as damages. [Scottsdale] must therefore defend.” (Docket Number: 00-CV-1793, dated 9/26/00).

Yet, this February, when RSR and the other defendants asked Judge Weinstein to let a jury decide the case precisely because the defendants might have to pay “money as damages,” suddenly the case was no longer about money damages. In denying the defendants a jury trial Judge Weinstein wrote, “[T]he court gives no weight to this demand for money damages and has no interest in awarding ‘damages.’” (Docket Numbers: 99-cv-3999 and 99-cv-7037, dated 3/24/03)

Who said anything about damages?
Well, actually… you did, judge.

Pass the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act seeks to protect firearms and ammunition manufacturers from being sued for the criminal misuse of their lawful products by third parties. This legislation seeks to prevent abuses to the American legal system.

Only passage of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (HR 1036 / S 659) will eliminate these frivolous lawsuits that threaten to destroy one of America's oldest, most important industries and eliminate the jobs of thousands of Americans. With 243 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives and 51 co-sponsors in the Senate, the Act enjoys strong bi-partisan support.

On Thursday, April 3, 2003 the Act was passed out of the House Judiciary Committee and onto the whole House by an overwhelming majority of votes. This was the last legislative hurtle the Act had to clear before it could be voted on by the entire House of Representatives. The House is expected to vote on the Act in the near future. See Testimony of Lawrence G. Keane

According to a recent national poll conducted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 69% of Americans would be more favorable toward their Senator or Representative if they voted to reform the way class action lawsuits are handled in the United States. A recent poll conducted by the American Tort Reform Association found that 83.4% of Americans believe there are too many lawsuits in America.