Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, April 15, 1995 TAG: 9504170061
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: Associated Press
DATELINE: SAN FRANCISCO LENGTH: Medium
In what could prove to be a historic legal victory for gun-control advocates, Superior Court Judge James Warren ruled that the maker of a semiautomatic pistol can be sued for the carnage at a San Francisco law firm in 1993.
For years, judges around the country rejected wrongful-death lawsuits against gun makers by offering some version of the National Rifle Association's maxim, ``Guns don't kill; people do.''
On Monday, Warren cited one thing missing from unsuccessful lawsuits in the past: The state has outlawed assault weapons.
Warren also said the weapon in the San Francisco attack, a TEC-DC9 made by Navegar Inc. of Miami, may be an ``ultrahazardous'' product, like dynamite and some pesticides. That means the maker can be held responsible for any harm it causes.
He said the plaintiffs also will have to prove the gun was designed for mass killing and marketed in a way that would appeal to criminals. But the judge cited Navegar ads proclaiming the TEC-DC9 was fingerprint-resistant and ``as tough as your toughest customer.''
Warren's ruling is the first to be based on a state law banning certain types of weapons.
Unless the ruling is overturned on appeal, the suit by eight survivors and relatives of the victims in the San Francisco attack will be the first of its kind to go to trial in the United States.
The suit names Navegar and others involved in the manufacture and sale of the pistols that Gian Luigi Ferri used in the attack in July 1993. He killed eight people and wounded six before shooting himself to death.
``It would have a national impact because California is such a huge market for guns,'' said Dennis Henigan, a plaintiffs' lawyer who also is legal director of the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence.
The ruling also means that a company that made and sold a gun legally in another state can be forced to pay damages for actions by a criminal in California, said Ernest Getto, lawyer for Navegar.
Getto said that despite the state's ban on assault weapons, courts in California and every other state have agreed that ``if you lawfully manufacture a product and lawfully market it and it's not defective, you're not liable for how it's used, particularly by a criminal.''
by CNB