Westforth Sports v Chicago - Product liability

[Euler]

On December 23, Westforth Sports filed a petition for certiorari to the US Supreme Court. (docket)

Petition for certiorari said:

...
QUESTION PRESENTED

Does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution allow a state to exercise specific personal jurisdiction over a non-resident retail seller of legal, non-defective, easily-transportable products based on the seller's foreseeability that some such products may, through the agency of third parties over whom the seller has no control, be transported into the forum state without any direction from the seller?
...
Westforth is a federally licensed firearms retailer with, at all times material hereto, its principal and only place of business located in Gary, Indiana, a few miles from the Illinois state line. ... The City of Chicago brought claims against Westforth on nuisance and negligence theories alleging that handguns sold by Westforth at its retail location in Indiana to individuals with valid, government-issued identification reflecting Indiana addresses were eventually trafficked into Illinois. Westforth has never sold any handguns at retail to anyone other than residents of the State of Indiana.
...
... The City of Chicago admitted that its claims against Westforth ... alleged straw purchases of handguns at Westforth's store in Indiana:

At oral argument, counsel for the City agreed that its complaint does not allege any claims based on Westforth’s direct sales of guns to Illinois customers, either through Illinois FFLs or at the counter.

After "extensive discovery on the issue of personal jurisdiction" ..., in an opinion dated May 25, 2023, the trial court granted Westforth's motion to dismiss, finding that the State of Illinois lacked specific personal jurisdiction over Westforth ...
...
In an opinion dated March 15, 2025, the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District reversed, relying not on any contract or other theory to make the transport of firearms into Illinois a deliberate act on the part of Westforth, but relying instead on the volume of firearms sold by Westforth in the previous half-century that had been recovered in Illinois and the conclusion that Westforth must have known that some of its customers were straw purchasers who may take firearms into Illinois .... Westforth sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Illinois ..., and its Petition for Leave to Appeal was denied on September 24, 2025 ....
...
The recent decision in Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos ..., wherein the Court refused to permit aiding and abetting liability even where it was known that some end users would likely commit illegal acts with firearms sold, set a standard in substantive law that should likewise be conclusively established in procedural law. The issue before the Court is to what extent, if at all, a retailer's geographic proximity to state borders and foreseeability that some products sold may eventually be transported across state lines by others may serve as a basis for establishing specific personal jurisdiction over non-resident retailers.
...
Finally, Courts have routinely rejected "knew or should have known" arguments for specific personal jurisdiction such as those put forth by the City and relied upon by the Appellate Court of Illinois.
...

[Glock43]

Perhaps Indiana should sue Michigan for all of the “pot shops” just across the border.  And even worse these shops advertise (“market”) on billboards all along ‘94 in Indiana!

[Tip]

Or perhaps sue IN, KY, MO, WI & IA for undercutting their exorbitant gas taxes and inciting the serfs, err citizens, of this fine state to participate in interstate transportation of gasoline - a tank full at a time…..

[ealcala31]

They've been closed down for a few years. And still...

[Billy Bob]

Maybe Chicago appealed the case in state court after Westforth had already gone out of business because it figured that Westforth wouldn't bother to fight it very hard.  It would have been an easy way to set a precedent that could be used to go after other out of state gun shops.

 

That's kind of the strategy that the Feds used in the infamous US v Miller case. The Feds knew full well that Miller and his codefendants wouldn't appear, and their side went unrepresented in the SCOTUS hearing.

[Euler]

On January 21, Chicago waived its right to respond.

[TomKoz]

More evidence that the Left / Democrats will Never stop trying to use lawfare against our RTKBA !

[Euler]

On January 21, 2026 at 06:16 PM CST, Euler said:→

On January 21, Chicago waived its right to respond.

On February 2, the Court requested a response.

[Euler]

On February 17, Chicago asked for an extension to respond.

[Euler]

On February 19, the Court extended Chicago's deadline to April 3.

[Euler]

On March 31, Chicago filed its brief.

[Euler]

On April 10, Westforth filed its reply.

[Euler]

Petition denied.