Judge Allows Suits Against Gun Maker
The manufacturer of the guns used in a law firm massacre in 1993 can be held liable for the “ultra-hazardous activity” of making and marketing the high-powered weapons, a Superior Court judge has ruled.
San Francisco Superior Court Judge James Warren said that Florida-based gun manufacturer Navegar Inc. may be liable under legal theories of strict liability and negligence.
Strict liability allows damages to be awarded for any harm caused by a dangerous product.
Warren’s ruling this week means that lawsuits against the gun manufacturer, filed on behalf of the victims and survivors of the shooting, can go forward.
Whether the manufacturers of the magazines and ammunition contained in those weapons can be included in the lawsuits will not be decided until summer.
“I feel great. These people have been taking big profits for too long,” said Stephen Sposato, whose wife was one of eight people killed when Gian Luigi Ferri rampaged through the San Francisco offices of the Petit & Martin law firm on July 1, 1993.
Michelle Scully, whose husband, John, died trying to protect her, said the ruling will force the manufacturers of assault weapons to think about the consequences of the products they make.
“This means they cannot sell these weapons and market them to the criminal element, take the money they make and sleep well that night,” she said.
Lawyers for Navegar indicated that they will probably appeal.
Using three guns, including two semiautomatic weapons and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, the 55-year-old Ferri killed eight people and wounded six others before turning a gun on himself.
The decision marks the first time that a court has ruled that an assault weapon maker may be held accountable for the damages resulting from the criminal misuse of its product.
Warren based his ruling on the fact that the TEC-DC-9 Ferri used was a slightly modified version of one banned by the California Legislature in 1989. He reasoned that the company introduced the gun into the general market and that it could have foreseen that it might eventually make its way into California and be used for criminal purposes.
