Big point: the trial court dismissed the suit for “failure to state a claim.” This is the first stage at which a suit can be reviewed. Dismissal is only proper if it is based on the pleading, bare written allegations. The CT Supremes said only that it couldn’t be, at this stage. Plaintiff still have to prove their allegations (after discovery, they can be challenged by a motion for summary judgement, and if that’s denied, fought at trial). The CT Supremes even allowed that plaintiff may have to surmount “herculean” barriers to win.

Supreme Court denies review in Remington v. Soto

Let’s pat down the hair on fire panic and read this article. The only truly danger I see is the owners of Remington not wanting to spend money defending themselves because it is cheaper that way.

Spread the love

By Miguel.GFZ

Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.

4 thoughts on “Supreme Court denies review in Remington v. Soto”
  1. Dont you just luv how gun owners fly off the handle and crash in flames along with the falling skies??? The gun grabbers aint WON yet. Take a pill. Geezus. Sit back and watch the screamers lose …

  2. I really want this trial to proceed.

    I want to see the plaintiff try to prove it was the advertising that pushed Lanza to kill. I want to see their arguments, and what they claim.

    “This advertising makes people think they can be seal team members just by shooting this rifle.” Or some other claptrap. I would just ask them to prove it.

    This argument is a specious as the claims made by that pissed off 16 year old from Sweden. Prove it, I say.

    Prove the advertising was responsible for the crime. Go on. I am waiting.

  3. The process is the punishment.

    Maybe they can be reimbursed for legal costs after the suit is over. Maybe they can even collect the hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars from a bunch of middle class plaintiffs? You know the plaintiffs lawyers will abandon them, just like the case in Colorado against the ammo distributor. How much will be spent, and how much will Remington’s business be hurt by their distraction?

    (I was an observer of what happened when a section of our company was investigated by federal investigators. Everyone from the junior engineers to the site Vice President were distracted for ten months. And it spilled onto everyone in the company too. No one went to jail, one person ended up being reassigned, but talk about a distraction.).

    If these lawsuits happen to a company once or twice a year, how long will they stay in the firearms business? How good a risk will their stock be for investors?

    How many other suits will we see, even if they lose?

Login or register to comment.