State Supreme Court to Hear Sandy Hook Lawsuit Nov. 14
The Connecticut Supreme Court will hear arguments Nov. 14 from a lawsuit that pits Sandy Hook families against the makers of the AR-15 rifle, which was used in the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre nearly five years ago.
October 18, 2017 at 06:13 PM
5 minute read
The Connecticut Supreme Court announced Wednesday that it will hear arguments en banc Nov. 14 for a lawsuit looking to hold gun makers liable for the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting.
Attorneys representing several families of those killed and injured in the shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School claim the AR-15 rifle used should be restricted to the military and law enforcement. While the families maintain Remington is selling a weapon “without regard for its track record in facilitating mass murder,” the gun maker said the plaintiffs are trying to “demonize the rifle.”
Adam Lanza mowed down 20 schoolchildren and six educators at the school.
The state's high court recently granted the families' request to hear arguments en banc, even though it's short two justices. A full bench of seven justices will hear the case.
Justice Dennis Eveleigh stepped down after reaching the mandatory retirement age of 70 earlier this month. There's also a vacancy left by Justice Carmen Espinosa, who took senior status in July.
Gov. Dannel Malloy recently nominated Appellate Judges Maria Kahn and Raheem Mullins to replaced Eveleigh and Espinosa. Those nominations are pending before the Legislature.
In addition, Chief Justice Chase Rogers is not available to sit Nov. 14 and Justice Gregory D'Auria recused himself from the discussions. It's not clear why Rogers isn't available that day or why D'Auria recused. In addition to the four other justices on the bench, hearing the arguments Nov. 14 will be Mullins and Appellate Court Justices Bethany Alvord and Nina Elgo.
The crux of the families' case relies on negligent entrustment and a claim that the gun makers knew their product is dangerous, but sold it anyway. Negligent entrustment occurs when one party provides a product to another while knowing the receiving party is likely to injure someone.
The state's high court must decide whether to remand the case back to Bridgeport Superior Court to allow the families to continue their discovery after the case was dismissed last year.
To date, 13 amicus briefs have been filed on behalf of 19 entities on both sides.
The Connecticut Supreme Court announced Wednesday that it will hear arguments en banc Nov. 14 for a lawsuit looking to hold gun makers liable for the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting.
Attorneys representing several families of those killed and injured in the shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School claim the AR-15 rifle used should be restricted to the military and law enforcement. While the families maintain Remington is selling a weapon “without regard for its track record in facilitating mass murder,” the gun maker said the plaintiffs are trying to “demonize the rifle.”
Adam Lanza mowed down 20 schoolchildren and six educators at the school.
The state's high court recently granted the families' request to hear arguments en banc, even though it's short two justices. A full bench of seven justices will hear the case.
Justice Dennis Eveleigh stepped down after reaching the mandatory retirement age of 70 earlier this month. There's also a vacancy left by Justice Carmen Espinosa, who took senior status in July.
Gov. Dannel Malloy recently nominated Appellate Judges Maria Kahn and Raheem Mullins to replaced Eveleigh and Espinosa. Those nominations are pending before the Legislature.
In addition, Chief Justice Chase Rogers is not available to sit Nov. 14 and Justice Gregory D'Auria recused himself from the discussions. It's not clear why Rogers isn't available that day or why D'Auria recused. In addition to the four other justices on the bench, hearing the arguments Nov. 14 will be Mullins and Appellate Court Justices Bethany Alvord and Nina Elgo.
The crux of the families' case relies on negligent entrustment and a claim that the gun makers knew their product is dangerous, but sold it anyway. Negligent entrustment occurs when one party provides a product to another while knowing the receiving party is likely to injure someone.
The state's high court must decide whether to remand the case back to Bridgeport Superior Court to allow the families to continue their discovery after the case was dismissed last year.
To date, 13 amicus briefs have been filed on behalf of 19 entities on both sides.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudge Slashes $2M in Punitive Damages in Sober-Living Harassment Case
Judge Splits Couple's Potential Recoupment of Punitive Damages Against eBay's Harassment Campaign
4 minute readVince McMahon's Accuser Pursues Records Amid Sexual Assault, Trafficking Claims
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Choice-of-Law Issues as the UCC 2022 Amendments Come into Effect
- 2Six Benefits of Taking an Opposing Medical Expert’s Deposition
- 3Ex-Prosecutor’s Trial Ends as Judge Throws Out Her Felony Indictment in Ahmaud Arbery Death Case
- 4Conversation Catalyst: Transforming Professional Advancement Through Strategic Dialogue
- 5Trump Taps McKinsey CLO Pierre Gentin for Commerce Department GC
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250