Supreme court won't revive gun lawsuit
Legal News Center
The Supreme Court has turned away a new challenge to a 2005 law that gives gun manufacturers immunity from lawsuits by shooting victims.
The justices on Monday refused to hear an appeal from Hector Adames Jr. to revive his lawsuit against the Beretta U.S.A. Corp. over the accidental shooting death of his 13-year-old son.
The Illinois Supreme Court threw out the lawsuit, citing the federal 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
Adames' son, Josh, was shot and killed by 13-year-old Billy Swan, who found his father's Beretta and removed the magazine containing the ammunition. He pointed the gun at Josh and pulled the trigger, not knowing that a bullet remained in the chamber.
Adames sued Beretta, saying the gun did not have the proper warnings or a safety mechanism that stops the gun from being fired without the magazine in place.
Related listings
-
Justices making new push to abolish elected judges
Legal News Center 12/11/2009An old debate about whether judges should be elected or appointed is heating up again.Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and several state Supreme Court justices are planning a nationwide push during next year's state legislative sessio...
-
Burglars hit offices of Blagojevich's legal team
Legal News Center 12/09/2009Burglars broke into the offices occupied by two members of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich's legal defense team overnight and stole eight computers and a safe, police said Friday.The break-in occurred at the South Side offices of veteran Chicago criminal...
-
Lawyer: Blagojevich would take 5th in casino suit
Legal News Center 12/08/2009Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich would claim his 5th Amendment right against self incrimination if asked to testify in a civil lawsuit spurred by his federal corruption indictment, his lawyer says.Attorney Jay Edelson told The Associated Press on...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.