View Single Post
Old November 14, 2019, 06:03 AM   #54
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by 44 AMP View Post
....I have a general question for our resident legal eagles, in regard to the claim of Remington being (some degree of) liable for the murders, would this be a "beyond reasonable doubt" or a "preponderance of the evidence" thing??
or some other standard I am unaware of??? perhaps a bit of both??

Does the claim Rem broke the advertising law make it a criminal matter? Would that part (breaking a law) be treated as a criminal matter and Rem's "responsibility" in the murder a civil matter with its different standards?
I haven't had time to do any research on this, but I'm going to bet on "preponderance." This is a civil matter, brought by non-government plaintiffs, so that's the usual standard of proof.

As to the question of whether it's civil or criminal . . . . We all like to think of actions as being either legal or illegal, but the issue is a little squishier than that. So here we go: Sometimes the gov't passes a law and says, "Don't do X. Doing X is a crime, punishable by . . . . " That makes X a crime. Sometimes, it passes a law that says, "Don't do Y. If you do Y and it harms someone, then they can sue you." In this case, Y isn't really a crime, but the gov't has created a private right of action against people who do Y. IOW, the gov't has made Y illegal, but isn't going to prosecute them for you. If you're harmed by someone doing Y, you have to take them to court.

As Frank noted, interlocutory appeals are disfavored. The courts don't want litigants taking every little trial court decision up on appeal. If you think the courts are clogged now, imagine what that would do. That's why the rules generally require that order be a "final order" before an appeal can be taken. The PLCAA is something of an exception to that rule, and I can't blame Remington from trying its hand there. Still, and while this is purely speculative, it may be that there simply wasn't enough evidence in for SCOTUS to hear and dismiss. Personally, I'll be watching for cross-motions for summary judgment and another round of appeals filed then. Whether or not those are heard . . . . who knows?
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.02936 seconds with 8 queries