Jeremy Richman, left, and his wife Jennifer Hensel, center, parents of Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting victim Avielle Richman, and Nelba Marquez-Greene, right, mother of victim Ana Marquez-Greene (courtesy AP)

“The parents of 10 children killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School have filed or soon will file notices in probate court that they plan to make wrongful death claims on their children’s behalf,” msn.com reports. This they’re doing as a prelude to suing Bushmaster, Newtown and/or the Newtown School Board and the estate of Nancy Lanza (the mother of spree killer Adam Lanza, murdered by her son before the attack). “The deadline to file civil lawsuits against the town of Newtown or the school board is Sunday, two years after the shooting. There are circumstances where a lawsuit against a private company, such as a gun manufacturer, could be filed within three years but . . .

that statute normally deals with product liability cases, which is not an issue here, according to several lawyers not involved with the case.”

It’s hard to see how the Sandy Hook parents could successfully sue Bushmaster, owned by The Freedom Group, owned by the multi-billion dollar private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management. As smartgunlaws.com reports . . .

In 2005, Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), a federal statute which provides broad immunity to gun manufacturers and dealers in federal and state court. Generally speaking, the PLCAA prohibits “qualified civil liability actions,” which are defined as civil or administrative proceedings which “result from the criminal or lawful misuse” of firearms or ammunition.

No matter how ill-fated or frivolous, a lawsuit against The Freedom Group/Cerberus on the heels of the anniversary of the Sandy Hook slaughter will cause no end of trouble for the Bushmaster folks.

Regular readers will recall that the California Teacher’s union called for Cerberus to sell The Freedom Group – or lose some $750 worth of CA teachers’ pension investments. Cerberus agreed and put the ailing conglomerate on the market. Nothing. Not even a nibble. Even as the post-Newtown surge filled the corporate coffers.

A media-friendly bloody shirt-waving lawsuit against Bushmaster would renew pressure on Cerberus to ditch TFG, both financially and socially (the Feinbergs and other Cerberus execs mix in a decidedly left-leaning social circle). Cerberus doesn’t like to walk away from a disaster – especially if American taxpayers can bail them out (e.g. Chrysler and Chrysler Financial). This time, I don’t think so.

At the same time, a civil lawsuit against Newtown and/or the Newtown School Board for “security issues at the school on the day of the massacre” could find purchase. The official reports into the killings were something of a whitewash, failing to identify key mistakes in the police response. And any light that can be shed on defective hard security or active shooter protocols would be most welcome.

We shall see. [h/t MC]

152 Responses to BREAKING: Sandy Hook Families Set to Sue Bushmaster, Newtown, Nancy Lanza’s Estate

      • Some POTG are quick to turn on one of their own. You call her an idiot but neglect to mention that she was the first victim that day.

        • By keeping guns around someone with the mental health issues she above all other people knew her son suffered from, Nancy Lanza was at least as reckless as anyone who has an ND and gets someone hurt or killed. Still tragic, but no less stupid for the tragedy.

        • Just because someone in the family has a mental illness the people surrounding them are no longer allowed their 2A rights? Sure, Nancy Lanza could have made it more difficult to acquire her guns but I in no way think she was stupid. I mean, who could have predicted this worst case scenario when family is involved?

          I swear the gun community is always quick to point the finger when something goes wrong and take credit when something goes right. It’s a sad event but Adam Lanza was mentally ill and did what was illegal; not sure why the fault is entirely on the mother for “being an idiot.”

        • @Alexander

          Well parking the freaking gun safe in his room does nothing to exonerate her there.

          Evidence heavily suggests she knew he was sick/had issues and played an active part in isolating him and helping keep him from any effective treatment.

          Now my opinion; In all reality she was probably just as wackado as he was, just in a different way.

      • The mom is tied for first place on the responsibility list along with her late son.
        FYI, Feinberg mostly hangs out with a right leaning crowd including many ex-Bush 1&2 officials..

        • I would assert that Bush 1 & 2 are both globalists, which hardly makes them or their appointees and/or social circle “right-leaning.”

        • My point was that the article stated and I quote, “the Feinbergs and other Cerberus execs mix in a decidedly left-leaning social circle.”

          I didn’t think that J. Danforth Quayle, John Snow, Donald Rumsfeld and others quite fit that description.

        • Sorry Don. To me, the left/right paradigm is inaccurate.

          To me, a better representation is all forms of state driven control from dictatorship to facism, communism, socialism etc. is on the left. All forms of minimal state control with maximum personal freedom to outright anarchy is to the right.

          If the middle is the perfect balance of state control with personal freedom, then Bush, Cheney and most Republicans would be on the far left just short of outright facists, right along with most Democrats, being short of outright communists.

          But both parties are no where near the ideal of minimal government and maximum personal freedom and responsibility.

      • Agreed. These parents are evil, doing nothing more than prostituting the corpses of their children.

        I hope they all have plans to move, because should their suit against Newton be successful, every citizen of Newton will hate them, once the tax hikes and budget cuts come through to pay the bill.

        Great job you grief pimps!

    • It’s a ploy for money. The Sandy hook parents have established:

      • They like money

      • They think that gun manufacturer’s are to blame for their children’s death, just like household chemical companies are to blame for the poisoning deaths of some children, construction workers are to blame for the construction of stairs for the falling deaths of children, and landscapers are to blame for the construction of swimming pools for the drowning deaths of children.

      • Some of the parents feel they have an opportunity to get some money from the evil gun manufacturers who are to blame for these deaths.

      • Some of the parents feel the gun manufacturers are not at fault at all, but they still like money, and would like to get some money from the gun manufacturers, and since they don’t own or endorse the ownership of firearms, this doesn’t really affect them.

      • Some of the parents feel that their kids cannot be traded for any amount of money, but getting some free money from the gun manufacturer (fault or no) could make them feel better and they endorse the government action of stealing money from gun manufacturer’s and giving that money to them to make them “feel” better.

    • While I seem to remember a Bushmaster being pulled from the trunk of the car, by the police, after the incident, my recollection is that it was never actually used in the school. ??????????

      • Went back and checked. That was something disseminated in the initial news reports. According to the latest information available now, a Bushmaster was used. There has been so much chaff thrown (government and media), I don’t think we’ll ever really know the whole story.

      • Whatever was pulled from the trunk visibly had a right-side-mounted charging handle, and quite a long profile. It was then reported that it was a Saiga by several sources of which I have no desire to dig up at the moment.

        Thankfully he didn’t sling that over his back before entering. Buckshot would pattern enormously at school-hallway length. Pardon my french, but FUCK the cockroach scum who perpetrated this, or any other similar atrocity. Those are the points I wanted to make. Thank you, and goodnight.

      • You are absolutely correct. I clearly remember on the day it happened ,that night when the cops started searching the car, opened the trunk, filmed from the helicopter and out came the Bushmaster, live, right on tv, filmed by the “news reporters” showing the cops holding the AR up in the air. Later on, the “news media” changed the story and started saying the massacre was done with the AR-15 , which was a lie. They wanted to make the “bad black weapon” the culprit of the attack. And people believed it . They had previously even stated on the news the attack had gone down with handguns .

    • I don’t think it’s dumb, merely misguided and very sad. I cannot imagine what it must be like to lose a child. That is something no parent should ever face, however the Newtown parents are not the first, nor sadly will they be the last.
      I also don’t think this is about the money. In their minds, it most likely about justice and being able to blame someone. When the killer took his own life, and before that, the life of his mother, he took away the people to blame from the families.
      Granted, had the killer survived, they may still have blamed others, and possibly filed a similar suit. Unfortunately, this is all they have left, so this is who they think should feel their wrath.
      I have been a POTG since I was a very young child, and I think that I am a reasonable person. I cherish my freedoms. However, I am also human, and I have my weaknesses. If I was in their shoes, I would probably do the same thing. Rationally, I know it is absolutely wrong. Considering what they lost, I can understand why. I don’t agree with it. I think it’s the wrong thing to do.
      It’s a pipe dream, but I hope that they reconsider. I hope that they instead channel their pain to do some actual good in this world. That won’t happen, but I hope. I hope they find peace in their lives. If I was in their shoes, I don’t know if I ever could.

    • Yep. Like suing Ford if I willfully chose to run over someone with my truck.

      I’d like to see that precedent set. Then every manufacturer of any item would be on the hook for willful misuse of their products. Idiots.

    • I was sorry for their loss. Now they’re just being scum exploiting the death of their children for early retirement.

    • Suing gun manufacturers over some jerk or looney using their weapons to kill people is as ignorant as blaming a teacher for a kid failing a test. It’s so completely far fetched. They want to sue the best source of big money instead of the actual cause of the catastrophe – the shooter. While they’re at it, why not go after the killer’s parents for “not raising him correctly”, or his significant other for possibly pissing him off enough to go off the deep end, or maybe the traffic cops who set him off by giving him a speeding ticket, or the hospital for not watching him 24 hours a day to make him take required medication, and on and on and on? What stupidity. The kids are dead, as is the shooter. Get on with your lives.

  1. Ow we are talking. Get scumbag lawyers in the mix to sue for money. Mo money. Its all about money. The lawyer industrial comples just like the Al Sharpton gang, is all about money.

    • It’s not just lawyers. At some point, a lawyer had to convince parents that this was a great plan. Any parent who has signed onto this generally falls into one of two camps:

      1) Bereaved and lacking any reason or sense, desiring to lash out at any aspect of their child’s demise (disappointing but forgivable)

      2) Exploiting tragedy with $$$$ sparkling in their eyes and willing to harm a law-abiding business which did nothing wrong to make a buck (unforgivable, this person is a piece of shit).

    • Its all about money.

      Of course it’s all about money. Unless you work for free, what you do is all about money too, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, In fact, it’s worthy of praise. Only Communists hate people because they’re “about money.”

      These “survivors” should sue. They will get a judgment against the Lanza estate. I don’t remember much about CT law (even though I practiced there a long time ago), but in many states the school would have absolute tort immunity. The manufacturers likewise should be immune under the Lawful Commerce act.

      Specious claims are the reason we must have tort reform.

      • “Of course it’s all about money. Unless you work for free, what you do is all about money too, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, In fact, it’s worthy of praise. Only Communists hate people because they’re “about money.”

        When your work is ruining the lives of innocent people, it’s absolutely NOT “worthy of praise” to make money.

    • Sadly, your right. The parents of the children each recieve over a quarter of a million dollars. The city of Newtown has received over a 192 million through govt grants and donations. What was the money used for? Tearing down the scene of the crime to replace it with a 50 million dollar school. How many new playgrounds does the city now have? And the new community center they plan to build. It’s sad what happened, but now it’s just a play for money, mo money, MO MONEY!

      Anyone else find it curious that NO ONE was wounded?

  2. Yeah, let’s sue Toyota every time someone gets run over by a drunk driver in a Corolla.
    Seems like grief and greed has overcome logic.

    • Sure, Then we can sue the maker of the alcohol, the bar it was sold at, the city for not having enough DUI patrols, and the state for giving the person a drivers license in the first place.

  3. Our nation definitely needs tort reform. We have way too many lawsuits. I would like to see a loser pays system. However, a lawsuit against the Sandyhook school might be appropriate. That will be a tough sledding given the fact that the Obama administration failed to properly investigate this incident.

    We still have thousands of schools in this nation with virtually no security. Allowing teachers to carry concealed would be the most effective security measure I could think of.

    • The problem with a strict “loser pays” construct is that it tilts the court system even more in favor of the rich. Let’s say you have been harmed by a company who released a faulty product. You hire a lawyer to sue them for damages. They have a legal team assembled from the top 10% of Ivy League law schools. You have the ambulance chaser with the office in a seedy strip mall. Even though you have been injured by arguably negligent behavior, your lawyer doesn’t do a good job arguing, and you lose. Now you’re on the hook for potentially millions in the legal costs incurred by the company, added onto your already bad situation. Now think about thinking through this at the time you hire your lawyer. Sure, maybe you win, but there is also the possibility that you lose, and lose big. Loser pays would have a severe chilling effect not just on frivolous torts, but all torts good and bad, when the downside risk is simply too high to accept. Tort reform, yes, but a simple loser pays isn’t surgical enough to get the job done properly.

      • Your hypothetical case is really a fantasy created by the plaintiffs’ bar. The reason that a plaintiff is stuck with an “ambulance chaser with the office in a seedy strip mall” is because the case sucks, not because the plaintiff has no money.

        Plaintiff’s lawyers usually work on a contingency fee — the client isn’t charged until and unless the case is won or settles. So not having money is no bar to hiring a great attorney.

        The richest lawyers in the world are not corporate defense lawyers. They are plaintiffs’ lawyers. What separates them from the pack is the quality of their cases. See, e.g., Peter Angelos and Joe Jamail.

        A loser pays system would only deter bad cases. Which is what we want to do.

        • Would your average Joe necessarily know about that cost structure, or know enough to ask? I would suspect probably not. So while hiring a great lawyer is possible, your average plaintiff likely isn’t going to know enough about how the system works to take advantage of that, and will go to a lawyer they think they potentially could afford. Maybe I’m way off base on this Ralph, it isn’t my playground, but I don’t see how this could be applied without creating a “by-catch” problem. Even if the case has some merit, that doesn’t necessarily guarantee a win. I’d actually appreciate your input on how this might work, as it’s something I’m quite interested in.

        • In every civil lawsuit, someone wins, and someone loses. The fact that someone loses is no indication that the claim or defense asserted was frivolous. More often than not, when cases get to trial, verdicts are based on who the jury believes, an inherently unpredictable outcome. Cases where there are disputes in the facts are legion; most of them are resolved by settlement prior to trial because of the inherent uncertainty of establishing the “true” facts. Generally, no such cases are “frivolous” absent proof that someone is committing perjury–proof that is rarely obtained, notwithstanding the fact that many parties lie to protect their perceived interests.

          Cases resolved on the law prior to trial are often appealed, and aid in the development of the law. Law is not set in stone; it evolves, and it evolves as a result of cases “on the bleeding edge.” And this is a good thing. Loser pays is overkill; it is enough to provide mechanisms for the shifting of costs for frivolous litigation, which is all that is really necessary given that the defendant in the vast majority of civil tort defendants have insurance. By contrast, most contracts, the breach of which are not covered by insurance, contain bilateral attorneys fees and costs clauses–i.e., loser pays.

          As applied to the current threatened litigation, all of the proposed defendants will likely be covered by insurance. If the plaintiffs want to attack a federal statute, they will most likely file in federal court–thus subjecting themselves to Rule 11 sanctions when the inevitable motion to dismiss is filed by Bushmaster’s (insurance defense) attorneys. School districts are generally insured, and as government entities, are entitled to sovereign immunity (subject to specified exceptions), on top of which it will be very difficult for plaintiffs to establish that the school “knew or should have known” that there was an appreciable risk of harm by a deranged killer–absent which the school owed no duty to arm teachers or provide other security.

          These views are based upon 25 years as an insurance defense attorney. In my experience, the truly frivolous cases are few and far between

        • Would your average Joe necessarily know about that cost structure, or know enough to ask?

          @Kyle, people who have been exposed to dozens of commercials per day touting the fact that plaintiff’s don’t have to pay will certainly know about the cost structure. BTW, some of those TV commercial lawyers are really good.

          Besides, I would expect that potential plaintiffs in high-profile cases don’t have to go looking for lawyers. The lawyers come looking for them.

          That’s how The Cato Foundation and Robert Levy found the plaintiffs for the Heller case. Levy went looking for them.

        • @Mark N, I’ve worked both sides of the street, representing at one time or another either plaintiffs or defendants. I totally support “loser pays.” It will not only eliminate frivolous cases, but also deter marginal cases where the goal of the plaintiff is to shake down the defendant to get a settlement. There are plenty of those.

          I expect that if the US adopted “loser pays,” nobody would have to wait five years to get a court date for a real case where the plaintiff is suffering without compensation.

        • Ralph is dead on the money on this. In a loser pays system, all lawyers will scrutinize every case to make sure it is not frivolous. If a case has no real chance of winning, it will never make it to trial at all. If you can’t show that you were genuinely hurt by someone, you won’t find a lawyer willing to take your case; not knowing that they will likely never get paid when you lose.

        • @ Ralph I’m not a lawyer, nor do I pretend to play one on TV or stayed at a Holiday Inn last night, but I do agree on “loser pays” system will go a long way to reform the system. I also believe the former Talk Show host and lawyer Neal Boortz advocated it quite a few times as well, and he practiced in that field if I remember correctly.

    • I could accept a lawsuit against every employee of the school, living or dead, for failing in their duty to protect their charges. With children that age, they are totally defenseless, those in charge of them must be prepared to defend their lives, at the very least. IOW, take a bunch of money from them, because they did not arm themselves adequately to protect those kids. Two can play that game.

  4. While I regret their loss and sympathize with their grief, this is not the way. The people they want to punish are already dead, leaving them without possibility of catharsis.

    Tons of money (which I doubt they will get) will not remove their grief, it will just make them more comfortable while they grieve.

      • This is more about them allowing themselves to be “championed” by lawyers that are almost guaranteed to be bankrolled by Bloomberg…in other words, they’re allowing themselves to be pawns in hopes of a fat payoff. Disgusting.

      • It’s about “feelings” and “money”, combined with the raw opportunism of Bloomie and his minions. Even if this goes nowhere, it garners headlines.

  5. Hell, why stop there? Lanza drove to the school, why not sue the company who made the car he drove? And for that matter, sue the company that sold the gas that was in the tank. Wait a minute, he drove on roads, right? Well, sue the city for building the roads he drove on to get there! Actually, why stop there? Just sue fucking EVERYONE, because you could probably come up with some idiotic argument for EVERYTHING being tangentially related to this incident.

    • This is exactly the rationale used to justify “you didn’t build this” and all of the Bravo Sierra that Elizabeth Warren spews.

    • Yep. Shoe manufacturer, previous teachers, friends, designer of the school, anybody who ever walked close to him… etc. Lawyers be hungry yo.

  6. Nothing like waiting until the last minute. And with Bushmaster practically giving away ar’s( what are carbon 15’s discounted to?) I don’t think they have a chance in hell. It will be interesting to see the suit against the school and the extreme lack of any security.

  7. These law suites are a complete waste of time and money.

    I would not be surprised if they have been egged by the Brady Bunch, Mother’s who nothing better to do, or Anytown that needs a law suite groups. Since they have no standing, they need someone to be the front man.

  8. I wonder if this is an attempt to get a court case moving through the system to eventually redefine or eliminate the PLCAA? The anti-gun folks are adept at playing the long con game. I suspect folks behind the scenes have other motivations than just money.

    • Honestly, these people were probably approached by others who have that as a political goal and their sorry was exploited to gently coerce them into going forward with this. What kind of scum uses victims of tragedy like that?

  9. There’s only one possible good thing that could come out of this, and I’m almost certain it would never happen. If the district were to be found liable for failing to provide a safe and secure environment, it could set a legal precedent. This could work towards suing any company which has a no gun policy, which is the exact reason it would never happen.

    • Think again. If that were to happen it would just add on another unfunded requirement for the school system, on top of all the other problems. Repealing GFSA won’t happen unless culture tips in our direction, which means that you’re talking about hiring security guards and installing other security systems. None of which will actually solve the problem, but will serve the purpose of absolving the school of liability. The effect of such a decision would be to further cripple schools that are already being hobbled by mission creep.

    • It was a safe and secure work place as the mental midget had to shoot through the glass doors to gain access. Having armed teachers is the best way to provide a secure school, since all guards would do is reinforce that nobody can be safe without the state sanctioned gun thug to protect you. Erase the gun free zones and ban the teachers that are nothing but wanton liberal shells of men as liberals should be banned from education as they are from the same stock as the murdering monster.
      These repulsive parents are trying to profit off of their children like many inner city dwellers that win the ghetto lottery off of playing the race card.

  10. People do weird things in the face of the fact that things DONT happen for a reason all the time. Sometimes things happen and you are helpless and there is no good reason. The guy responsible for what happened is DEAD. The woman who gave birth to him you are trying to sue is DEAD. Unless the several million AR rifles are sprouting legs and shooting people every day or blowing up in people’s faces when they try to use them, Bushmaster doesn’t have a faulty product. And if the city of Newtown failed you because police can’t teleport, then what you are asking for is an armed presence in your schools… and that’s what we’ve been saying forever.

  11. Maybe this is not so much an attack on Bushmaster as it is an effort to begin influencing public opinion against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. In any event “Never let a bloody shirt go to waist”

    • PLCAA exists because of crap like this.

      Nobody would be stupid enough to sue a car manufacturer when someone does a burnout through a farmer’s market, nobody sues booze manufacturers when someone gets drunk and beats his wife to death with a lamp (sue the lamp manufacturer too!) but for some reason people think they can sue a gun manufacturer when their product gets used unlawfully.

  12. Blame shifting has become the way to avoid responsibility and make money in our society. Can’t be the fault of the mentally ill person that did the deed or his parents for letting him have access to the weapons, can it? So, it must be the fault of the gun, the bullets or any company that might have enough money to make the lawsuit worthwhile. How about the school for creating an environment where mentally ill people are allowed to shoot people. Or, better yet, how about the lawyers that originally created the laws that keep the guns out of the hands of the potential victims so they can defend themselves? I like the last one the best.

  13. To many discrepancies with the whole Sandy Hook shooting incident. I hope that autopsy reports complete with pictures, Death Certificates and eyewitness reports as well as news coverage from all sources will be admitted for review by the jury before any amount is paid out.

    • 100% agree with this. One red flag after another. Why sue now, years later? Every other school shooting in history was quickly followed by a lawsuit after the event. Why demolish the school? That was never done in previous cases. Why the non-disclosure agreements for the demolition contractors? Well… maybe it’s not about a school shooting at all. It’s about our rights being stripped away, one restriction/law/bill/amendment at a time.

  14. When will people start suing the auto makers for the drunk driver? Or the distillers? Or the motor vehicles department for the unlicensed driver? Or the DOJ for the release of the criminal?

  15. Suing Nancy Lanza’s estate certainly seems warranted to me. She let her obviously deranged, mass-murderer worshiping son have ready access to her weapons. That’s straight out negligence if not gross negligence.

    The School/Town/State were also likely negligent for poor security and an even poorer response.

    If my wife were a teacher killed that day and my family just lost half our income and benefits etc, you can bet your ass I would be suing. And so would all of you Tort Reformers I have no doubt.

    I just wouldn’t be suing the gun manufacturer. They have no liability.

      • Her negligence took place before any of that. It was when she told Adam the safe combination. That she was murdered for it doesn’t make her any less culpable before the law; just unable to answer in person (hence, suing the estate).

    • “If my wife were a teacher killed that day and my family just lost half our income and benefits etc, you can bet your ass I would be suing. And so would all of you Tort Reformers I have no doubt.”

      Exactly! If something tragic has happened to me, and my family has fallen on hard times as a result, I DESERVE to have someone else throw money at me without my having done anything to earn it!

      America needs MORE of this mentality!

      /sarc

      • Her gun safe was in the kid’s room. And he had the combination. He had unrestricted access to her guns. In the same room, he kept all sorts of cut out pictures and charts of mass shooters. He is said to have been obsessed with mass shooters. He was also obviously mentally unstable. Yet, the mother did nothing apparently to protect her weapons.

        That makes her negligent. That fact that she was killed by the son doesn’t erase her culpability. Her money should go to the victims.

        • Adam Lanza was an adult (20 years old) not a minor.

          If you had a roommate that you thought was a little nutty but not suicidal or a serial/spree killer and that spree killer murdered you, took your firearms and went on a spree, should you be liable?

          What if he did it with something other than a firearm?? You guys are putting the firearm on a pedestal, claiming it should be locked up at all times, and assigning blame to the one that didn’t secure it, rather than the murderer who killed the owner and used the firearm for other crimes.

          It shouldn’t my fault for the deaths others due to some spree shooter for my keeping my rifle on the wall or in a glass case when it is in fact the fault of the murderer who killed me and used my property to cause destruction and chaos on others. Look again please, at what you guys are arguing.

        • “Her money should go to the victims.”

          OK, I’ll bite. She had guns, and a gun safe. Would those be destroyed by your master plan, or sold to get that MONEY? We know the answer.

          Beyond that, I think he was her only child, who cares where the money goes? Let each family enjoy dinner at Burger King at her expense, that’ll teach her! While lawyers retire.

        • If you knowingly give him the gun (in this case, the combination necessary to obtain it), then sure.

          And yes, it would be exactly the same if she, say, gave him access to a sword.

          BTW, the kid was not just “a little bit nutty”. He was seriously disturbed, and this came up routinely whenever he was examined, but his mom refused to acknowledge that.

    • i imagine in such a scenario there would be some form of insurance coverage (workers comp?) since your wife would have been killed in the course of her employment.

      can’t imagine anyone decided the school has a reasonable expectation that a madman will shoot the place up to the point where not securing against such an act would be considered negligence

      i’m with a few other posters : the suit against Lanza’s estate is the only one with merit..

      • i’m with a few other posters : the suit against Lanza’s estate is the only one with merit..

        Please explain how it has merit?

        • Hokay! He murdered his mother, thus inheriting all her possessions. He murdered other people afterwards, thus can be sued for being a bad boy after inheriting. Therefore, all her and his vast riches can be split up by the lawyers involved. QED.

    • Exactly how was Nancy Lanza at fault?

      her 20 year old son murdered her and took her guns. How is that really any different from a stranger breaking into your house, murdering you and then proceeding to use your guns to shoot up a school. Even if they were locked in a safe – safes only buy time. Should your estate be sued because someone (or one of your crazy relatives) murdered you and took your guns and used those guns in a crime?

      Maybe you should reassess your argument here.

      • You’re totally confusing cause and effect here.

        She put a gun safe in his room, and told him the combination, in effect giving him access to guns, knowing full well (but refusing to accept) that he was mentally unstable to the point where this was an incredibly stupid thing to do.

        Then he used that knowledge to gain access to the guns, murder her, and proceed on the rampage.

        Her negligence is what set off the entire chain of events, beginning with her own murder.

        • That is exactly right, she was the “enabler” of his killing by her own conduct. She apparently could not handle the unfortunate truth about her son and his inner demons. She should have retained full control over those firearms and kept them locked safely away from him at all times they were apart. Yes, she paid with her life, which is sad, yet she does bear some responsibility here just the same. I hate this new society where everyone is so PC and cannot accept the truth when it is plain as day.

  16. Well, why not sue the State for requiring your kids to attend school? Why not sue the glass company that made the non-bullet-proof widows for the school, or the architect that specified them? Why not sue the car manufacturer that made Lanza’s vehicle? Why not sue the estates of the teachers that failed to save your children? Why not sue yourselves for having children?

    • But all those frivolous lawsuits are just ignoring the TRUE culprit, whom we can all agree is REALLY responsible.

      That’s right: the clothing manufacturers. If THEY hadn’t made clothing that appealed to Adam, he wouldn’t have had anything to wear and would have been too embarrassed to travel anywhere to commit any crime. It’s time Big Clothing stopped getting away with enabling all these criminals!

  17. good, then FINALLY, those hoplophobic kunts would have to actually examine ‘classified’ non-‘investigation’ into Sandy Hook, that apparently no FOIA could breach… if barely.

    then, we’ll see who the REAL ‘negligent’ party was and is, and we’ll see who actually received ‘hush money’ under deposition & cross examination.

      • If you pick any field/subject, good lawyers (small minority) are trying to undo the mess created (or facilitated) by all the other lawyers. I say thank you to the handful of the good ones. I hope all the rest get cancer. Soon.

  18. So they’re going to sue Bushmaster for… what, exactly? The AR-15 apparently worked exactly as it was meant to do, albeit on targets that nobody in their right mind would recommend.

    If Bushmaster sold me a gun, which detonated upon firing because of a faulty firing chamber, then I could sue them for negligence and incompetence, or at least my family could, as I probably wouldn’t have a face anymore.

    But suing a company for making a working product that performed within specifications is about like suing the police for arresting a drunk driver. Even by their own admission, an AR-15 is a gun designed purely for killing children in large numbers, and this one in particular did it quite handily, until its operator gave up and choked on his own bullet.

    I’m sure to many I sound ghoulish, but I no longer see a point in trying to fight the enemy on a higher level. It’s like when the US Marines fought the Japanese: at first, they fight with honor and restraint, but when the enemy behaves like churlish animals, the restraints come off, and the flamethrowers and A-bombs come out.

  19. Why stop at the manufacturer? Why not sue the miners who pulled the ore out of the earth that was smelted down, refined and then case into bullets, shell casings, etc. Heck, why not sure Mother Earth for making the ore to begin with?

  20. And in other news, the Bosnian family in Missouri will be suing craftsman for making hammers and New Orleans will be suing the sun for creating heat which led to hurricaine katrina.

  21. They are going to blame the town and school board for not protecting their children? huh… I wonder if this will encourage larger signs….

  22. Nancy Lanza paid for her willful ignorance and neglect with her life. Wasn’t that a high enough price for the murderous son she raised? There is a difference between justice and revenge, I wish people would understand that sometimes.

    • A civil suit is not about punishing someone, it’s about compensating damage done. That’s why it’s completely separate from a criminal trial in cases where both are applicable. In this case, the parents want some compensation for their loss, and since it was her negligence that enabled the perpetrator to do what he did, her estate is on the hook for paying that compensation.

  23. So their children are murdered, which was a horrible situation I wouldn’t wish on anybody. But how is trying to get money from the company that manufactured the gun gonna help anything? Their children are still dead. That sounds horrible but it’s true.

  24. Granted the episode is about sexual harassment, but skip to 3:46 and enjoy.

    Bevis and Butthead
    Season 5, Episode 47 . . .

    “We are going to sue the girl. We are going to sue the teacher. We are going to sue the school system, and we are going to sue the girl’s parents.”

  25. While I am heartbroken for their tragic loss, this is just a frivolous lawsuit and I hope to see Bushmaster counter sue for damages. This is no different than if 9/11 families filed suit against Boeing for making the planes that led to their loved ones dying tragically at the hands of terrorists.

    This is just lawyers pressuring still grieving parents to not let the statute of limitations pass on what they see could be a big payday.

  26. This is another bullshit case that any judge shoul dismiss do to the plain fact that the product did what it was designed to do it is not defective. The person using it was defective. The gun did not decide to load it self and go kill anyone. Do we sue car manufactures when someone gets run over by one. No!!! Why? Because it did not decide to roam the streets looking to run someone over.

  27. Even though the law is very clear, I`m sure the slip and fall attorneys will shop for a pliable judge who will ignore it and allow this case to go to trial. They are rolling the dice on this. Even if they dont prevail in court, they could still cost Bushmaster and Cerberus a great deal of money defending this lawsuit. It is not likely that they would recover their legal expenses as judges are reluctant to enforce loser pays in civil actions.

  28. Um…..wasn’t the AR found in the trunk, and said horrible act enacted with pistol and shotgun? Either way, agree, this is just a bunch of ambulance chasers pushing families to take a legal action to recoop money to fill their shattered lives….at the price of 40% legal fees….

    • That turns out to be misinformation. There was some confused reportage at first, but it was then clarified.

      Doesn’t keep the tinfoil hats from repeating it. It would be perfect karma for them (the tinfoil hat wearers) to be held to some mistaken statement they make for the rest of their lives.

  29. Cannot sue the firearm manufacturer UNLESS you can prove the firearm is/was defective. Just because a bad guy killed someone with it is not a good enough reason. Just as you cannot sue Ford or Chevy or any other car maker because an accident killed someone. Unless the vehicle is/was defective. Just because a drunk driver kills someone with his car does not mean you sue the automaker.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act

  30. Call me crazy but: Who cares?

    I mean, yeah, Sandy Hook was a sad event that kill 20 people. But every year there’s almost 100 people that die from peanuts allergy… Does anyone cares about their families?

    Each loss is a tragedy for the families, but not a reason to keep bringing it again and again and again on the table, playing the whole victim thing… Nobody cares about some families that loose someone because of peanuts allergy, even if they would try to sue peanuts farmers.

    End of story, let’s move on and toss me a bear and some peanuts 😉

    • Because there is nothing about peanuts that can further their agendas and profits and because of … GUNS! EVIL GUNS!

      Also… peanuts are not mainstream media profitable. The mainstream media is fueled by money. Money is generated by attention. Attention is seized by the confrontation and collision of opposing ideas/ideals. The media frenzy and raining of money is what follows. The mainstream media doesn’t care about rights (or even real news). They only care about money and peanuts don’t sell.

    • Yep.

      And suing against the estate of someone who didn’t lock up their tools when some crazy person took that tool, killed them with it, and then proceeded to go on a rampage.

  31. I guess that I’ll have to do my part and support Bushmaster. Time to buy another Patrolman’s Carbine to put away for a rainy day. With prices down to around $700-$750 for these again, it’s not a bad investment anyway. And besides, on that rainy day it would be a key component in the kit that you’re handing out to the “Ill just come to your house when TSHTF” crowd.

  32. I seriously doubt they are going after money. This is a political statement.

    BUT, if they look hard at the levels of security . . . . The doors could only be locked from the outside. . . I understand why but that was poor. They may have a case.

    BUT, if they look hard at the timelines for police response they may have a case.

    Bushmaster is in the clear, like suing a car manufacturer when a drunk kills someone. I feel really sorry for those folks and probably would do the same just out of RAGE!

  33. I’m sorry for their loss, but is millions of dollars the equivalent of having their children back? Will money actually replace their children’s void in their lives? How will causing someone else financial strain ease or eliminate the parents own grief? Will this lawsuit adequately take the place of all the experiences the parents will miss out on?

    I’ve said the same thing several different ways, but the answer is the same to every variety of the question.

    A resounding “no”.

    • Does anyone think there are any “millions” in store for those suing the Lanza estate? Any life insurance on the mom will not be paid, as the beneficiary would be the woman’s killer, the policy is void. I’d bet raising the dipshit was not cheap, would also bet cash reserves are close to nil. Sue away, any actual money will be sucked dry by the lawyers.

  34. What brand shoes was Lanza wearing during the attack?

    Hope they’re on the list to be sued, those shoes sure helped him move around with efficiency and ease…

    not sure if he coulda done what he did barefoot

  35. They’re going to sue the school district for a lack of security but can’t imaging using a gun to defend children? What planet does these people come from?

  36. This isn’t about greed or grief. It’s about not letting a crisis go to waste. It’s about promoting an ideology.
    In 2005 Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Anything that Congress passes into law can be repealed by Congress or….wait for it….Executive Order.
    Repealing or modifying the PLCA will make gun manufacturers vulnerable to a flood of lawsuits and make selling guns in this country no longer profitable.
    Repealing this law or modifying it to not cover assault style weapons would be a brilliant victory for enemies of freedom. It would secure Mr. Obama’s legacy.
    Someone please tell me it will never happen.

  37. This is just me and I know I might get jumped on in here but I think this whole Newtown idiocy could of been avoided by Ms. Lanza. I’m against laws that require gun owners to lock their guns up but hey if I have a kid that is a little crazy in the head I’m lockin my shit up with a combination lock for my safety and my crazy kids safety. The thing is no laws are needed to do this type of thing. I think that makes sense …same thing I’d do if i had some prohibited person living with me. It may not be effective when all is said and done but at least I tried to minimize the risk of some type of event from happening.

  38. I’ve seen a little blaming on the part of the mother, and I’d like to remind you all of something. She tried, unsuccessfully, to have her son committed. This is likely why she was the first victim that terrible day. I don’t know the circumstances behind storage, but I would hope she had the sense to lock it up, but after death, she would have had no means of stopping him from accessing whatever means of storage she had.

  39. has any of the so called ‘ parents of the deceased children’…even seen the bodies of their children after the incident…..as there does not seem to be ANY forensic evidence of any deaths in that building since no bodies were processed through the local hospitals….just asking

  40. Well why not, nothing like a little cha-ching cha-ching or ba-bling -ba-bling to help you get over the loss of your child.

  41. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the sole heir to Nancy Lanza’s estate Ryan Lanza, the killer’s brother? So wouldn’t a judgement against the estate be essentially taking money from a completely innocent young man who lost his mother AND his brother?

  42. I’ve always seen wrongful death suits as nothing more than greed. “Hey, our loved one is dead, let’s get some money out of it”. If a member of my family was killed, I’d want justice, not cash.

  43. This is clearly all about the money. If it were about anything else these law suits would have been filed more than a year ago. These are being filed only a few days before the deadline for such.

    Trying to make money off of their deceased children. This makes this horrible tragedy even worse.

    • the FBI statistics didn’t include sandy hook, where were all the funerals?, you would have had each funeral media sucking on everyone.. the school was knocked down with armed guards so no one could take anything, still have not seen any report and the building is gone.. oh and look at this,this is one of the parents laughing then composing himself for camera.. and look at the video of the arm in the trunk it was no AR!! i still want to see the final report!

      http://youtu.be/xTSpvuXfn2A

  44. I read 2 articles above this one and the FBI is saying it was all a Hoax! No one was hurt or killed. It was supposed to have been a planned event at the school. Did these people lose a child in that event? Wasnt’ the school demolished and rebuilt? Did a teacher get honored for saving her class but she herself died? What is the truth?

    • The truth is that this was a completely staged media event. The truth is the entire town of Newtown.. everyone.. made millions of dollars in the process. The truth is a mass manipulation of the American people for the exact purpose of gun control. The truth is you are being lied to by these sociopaths every single day.

  45. I thought the issue of product liability for gun crime was already decisively settled and gun makers cannot be held liable for misuse of a legal product – can an attorney speak on that?

    As for the estate of Nancy Lanza, that’s probably gonna evaporate. Seems that she wasn’t the most prudent person in the world, what with her nutty fruitcake of a son under her roof.

  46. This individual had never committed a violent act in his life. No playground fights, no harming of animals, no self-injury, nothing. There was absolutely, positively no justification for presuming a 100% nonviolent person would suddenly become violent. It’s ridiculous to blame Nancy, for not the least of which reasons is that this was (allegedly) a 20 year old man. He was under NO obligation to take any medication he didn’t want to, attend any therapy he didn’t want to, or have anyone babysit his (possibly nonexistent) gun use. I am baffled at those saying he “didn’t receive care.” All that mother and school DID was care for him–over, and over, and over again, trying doctor after doctor, special learning programs, always striving to make the situation better. It is utterly wacko to say this person’s family and school and professional community “dropped the ball” or “missed opportunities.” That’s just lawyer-speak for “find someone to sue.” This kid was provided with educational, medical and psychiatric services up one end and down the other–the point is that it didn’t matter. You can’t predict the unpredictable. And what this individual did was 100% unpredictable.

  47. There is nothing more despicable than to politicize death. It is sickening and painful to watch. People and children are dead. And what is the outcome? Sue for money!

    They could get involved to help find solutions with a focus on causation but yet they attack the last and weakest link in the chain, the firearm.

    I do not directly blame the families but do blame the less than good ethics of those who approach them and suggest they engage in these endeavors.

    Wouldn’t it be nice if we could proceed with logic rather than continue to respond and react with raw emotion?

  48. I’m sorry for their loss, however. If you think that this isn’t strictly a politically driven spectacle, guess again. This would be like suing Chevrolet or Toyota for being involved in an auto accident and suing the city for maintaining the street that you were on and the state for funding the construction of the street in that city and then suing the U.S. Government for buying the crud oil and the oil company for processing it to make fuel because you let go of the steering wheel while driving down the road. How is it Bushmaster’s responsibility for the unintended use of their product? I have also heard that the parents stated that an AR-15 was used, conflicting reports! It has also been stated that this weapon was found in the trunk of his car. The actual shooting was done by pistols not AR-15’s.

    Their position is that Bushmaster should not be selling the AR-15 because it’s a “military” weapon. Not true, this proves that the parents and their lawyers not know what they are talking about. The civilian AR-15 has a rate of fire near that of many other semi automatics weapons on the market. It doesn’t have a selector for single fire, three round burst or fully automatic. This is nothing but a gross example of greed by the parents and the lawyers representing them. No logic here at all.

  49. I’m sorry for their loss, however. If you think that this isn’t strictly a politically driven spectacle, guess again. This would be like suing Chevrolet or Toyota for being involved in an auto accident and suing the city for maintaining the street that you were on and the state for funding the construction of the street in that city and then suing the U.S. Government for buying the crud oil and the oil company for processing it to make fuel because you let go of the steering wheel while driving down the road. How is it Bushmaster’s responsibility for the unintended use of their product? I have also heard that the parents stated that an AR-15 was used, conflicting reports! It has also been stated that this weapon was found in the trunk of his car. The actual shooting was done by pistols not AR-15’s.

    Their position is that Bushmaster should not be selling the AR-15 because it’s a “military” weapon. Not true, this proves that the parents and their lawyers not know what they are talking about. The civilian AR-15 has a rate of fire near that of many other semi automatics weapons on the market. It doesn’t have a selector for single fire, three round burst or fully automatic. This is nothing but a gross example of greed by the parents and the lawyers representing them. No logic here at all.

  50. Good, perhaps now Bushmaster will DEMAND to see evidence that a shooting actually took place at Newtown. The cover up and misdirection of evidence, the bulldozing of the school, the silencing of witnesses, or the fact that NOBODY ever even saw “Adam Lanza” for the 3 years prior to this “event” all point to a plan to ban guns gone horribly wrong.

    This is one of the biggest lies ever perpetrated on the American public…

    Before you start calling me a “conspiracy theory nut”… Produce some crime scene photos….. Oh wait.. you can’t because it’s “top secret”….oh yeah and they bulldozed the entire school……Hmmmm….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *