City of Chicago v. Beretta USA Corp.
Decision Date | 04 November 2002 |
Docket Number | No. 1-00-3541.,1-00-3541. |
Citation | 785 N.E.2d 16,271 Ill.Dec. 365,337 Ill. App.3d 1 |
Parties | The CITY OF CHICAGO and the County of Cook, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BERETTA U.S.A. CORPORATION; Pietro Beretta Sp. A.; Browning Arms Company.; Bryco Arms Inc.; Colt's Manufacturing Company, Inc.; Davis Industries, Inc.; Glock, Inc.; Glock Gmbh; Hi-Point Firearms; H & R 1871, Inc.; International Armament Corporation; Carl Walther Gmbh; Lorcin Engineering Company, Inc; Kel-Tec CNC Industries, Inc.; Navegar, Inc.; Phoenix Arms; Raven Arms, Inc.; Smith & Wesson Corporation; Sturm, Ruger And Company, Inc; Sundance Industries, Inc.; Taurus International Manufacturing, Inc.; Forjas Taurus, S.A.; B.L. Jennings, Inc.; Faber Brothers, Inc.; Riley's, Inc.; ABN Sports Supply, Inc., a/k/a Ashland Shooting Supplies, Inc.; Universal Firearms, Ltd.; B & H Sports, Ltd.; Breit & Johnson Sporting Goods, Inc.; Chicago Ridge Gun Shop & Range, Inc.; John Riggio, Jr.; Elizabeth Riggio; Jim Riggio; Gun World, Inc.; Midwest Sporting Goods Company; The Sportsman's Center/Illinois Gun Works, Ltd.; Shore Galleries, Inc.; The Sports Authority, Inc.; and Donald R. Beltrame, Defendants-Appellees. |
Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Mara S. Georges, Corporation Counsel of City of Chicago, Chicago (Lawrence Rosenthal, Deputy Corporation Counsel, Benna Ruth Solomon, Chief Assistant Corporation Counsel, Suzanne M. Loose, Assistant Corporation Counsel, of counsel), Roger Pascal, Thomas B. Quinn, Ronald Safer, Robert Rivkin, Schiff, Hardin & Waite, Chicago, Richard A. Devine, State's Attorney for the County of Cook, Chicago (Thomas Rieck and Mark Pera, Assistant State's Attorneys, of counsel), Michael J. Hayes, Patrick McKey, John T. Roach, Lisa Martin, Gardner, Carton & Douglas, Chicago (David Kairys, of counsel, Philadelphia, PA) for Appellants.
Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon, Chicago (James P. Dorr, Sarah L. Olson, Lisa S. Simmons, of counsel), James Valentino, Jr., Algoma, WI, M. Leslie Kite, Ana Maria Downs, Law Offices of Loretta M. Griffin, Richard J. Leamy, Jr., Wiedner & McAuliffe, Ltd., Chicago, Melissa Anne Maye, Yorkville, Lora E. Minichillo, Kenneth H. Denberg, Schwartz & Freeman, Irving Levinson, John A. Galotto, Piper, Marbury, Rudnick & Wolfe, William N. Howard, Daniel J. Voelker, Freeborn & Peters, Chicago, for Appellees.
Steven L. Baron, D'Ancona & Pflaum LLC, Locke E. Bowman, Michael Schaper, Jonathan K. Baum, Katten Muchin Zavis, Nathan P. Eimer, Scott C. Solberg, Adam B. Deutsch, Eimer Stahl Klevorn & Solberg, Chicago, for Amici Curiae.
James M. Beck, Pepper Hamilton LLP, of Philadelphia, PA, Hugh F. Young, Jr., Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc., Reston, VA, for Amicus Curiae,
The City of Chicago (City) and the County of Cook (County) (collectively, plaintiffs) filed suit against 18 firearm manufacturers, 4 firearm distributors and 11 firearm dealers (collectively, defendants). Plaintiffs' original complaint asserted one count for public nuisance and one count for negligent entrustment. The negligent entrustment count was dismissed. Plaintiffs' second amended complaint, inter alia, alleges that the defendants' marketing practices unreasonably facilitate the unlawful possession and use of firearms in Chicago, and that the defendants are liable for participating in the creation and maintenance of a public nuisance. Following oral argument, the trial court's September 15, 2000, order granted defendants' motions to dismiss "pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-615 and/or 2-619." Plaintiffs' second amended complaint was dismissed with prejudice. The issue presented on review is whether the complaint properly pled a cause of action for public nuisance under Illinois law.
Plaintiffs filed suit against the defendants in November 1998. Plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint in April 1999. Defendants moved to dismiss plaintiffs' first amended complaint. On February 10, 2000, the trial court dismissed count II (negligent entrustment) and reserved ruling on count I (public nuisance). Following the dismissal of count I, plaintiffs moved for leave to file a second amended complaint to add data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF).
Specifically, plaintiffs' second amended complaint alleges:
The City requests allocated monetary damages attributable to each defendant to compensate the City for the costs it bears as a result of the public nuisance, including costs of emergency medical response, police department programs, and the prosecution of gun control ordinance violations. The County seeks compensation for the costs that it bears as a result of the defendants' conduct, including costs for treatment of victims of firearm violence and the costs to prosecute and defend the criminal misuse of a firearm. The City and County also seek punitive damages to "punish and deter conduct that intentionally and recklessly endangers the people of Chicago" and permanent injunctive relief to abate the public nuisance caused by the defendants.
Defendants moved to dismiss the plaintiffs' second amended complaint pursuant to section 2-615 of the Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 2000)). The Sports Authority, Inc. (Sports Authority), a gun dealer, filed a separate motion to dismiss pursuant to section 2-619 (735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 2000)). In its oral ruling on September 15, 2000, granting defendants' motions to dismiss plaintiffs' second amended complaint, the trial court stated:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Johnson v. Bryco Arms
...349 F.3d 1191 (9th Cir.2003); White v. Smith & Wesson Corp., 97 F.Supp.2d 816 (N.D.Ohio 2000); Chicago v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 337 Ill.App.3d 1, 271 Ill.Dec. 365, 785 N.E.2d 16 (2003); Young v. Bryco Arms, 327 Ill.App.3d 948, 262 Ill.Dec. 175, 765 N.E.2d 1 (2001); Gary v. Smith & Wesson, C......
-
In re Firearm Cases
...finding that a cause of action for nuisance cannot be stated against gun manufacturers. (See City of Chicago v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp. (2002) 337 Ill.App.3d 1, 271 Ill.Dec. 365, 785 N.E.2d 16, revd. (2004) 213 Ill.2d 351, 290 Ill.Dec. 525, 821 N.E.2d 1099 [holding gun manufacturers have no du......
-
Ileto v. Glock Inc.
...accountable for the injuries sustained, appellees can be held liable for creating the alleged nuisance. Id.; see also City of Chicago, 271 Ill.Dec. 365, 785 N.E.2d at 31.28 Thus, we conclude that Glock's acts as alleged in the FAC would allow a reasonable jury to conclude that the defendant......
-
City of Gary ex rel. King v. Smith & Wesson Corp.
...City of Cincinnati v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 95 Ohio St.3d 416, 768 N.E.2d 1136, 1142 (2002) (citation omitted). The court in City of Chicago v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., noted common law public nuisance is "not limited to those activities the legislature has declared [to be] public nuisances." ......