Chicago sues Indiana gun store

[InterestedBystander]

From Capitol Fax. Full article at link.

 

https://capitolfax.com/wp-mobile.php?p=50101&more=1

 

Complaint is here:

https://everytownsupportfund.org/documents/2021/04/westforth-complaint.pdf/

 

..."Everytown Law press release

 

The city of Chicago has sued a Gary, Indiana gun store alleged to have sold hundreds of illegal guns trafficked into Chicago. Filed by Everytown Law, the litigation arm of Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, along with the City of Chicago Department of Law and the law firm Mayer Brown LLP, the lawsuit alleges that the store repeatedly broke federal gun laws and ignored clear signs of straw purchases and gun trafficking, contributing to a public nuisance in Chicago, including in connection with dozens of sales in 2020 and 2021 that resulted in federal criminal charges against the straw purchasers. The complaint cites years of previously-unseen audit reports by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, showing repeat violations, warnings, and two recommendations for revocation of Westforth Sports Inc.s license to sell guns. It also points to court records showing that, between 2014 and 2021, over 40 federal criminal prosecutions for illegal gun purchases in the Northern District of Indiana, where Westforth is located, involved guns sold by Westforth."...

[Euler]

... alleged to have sold hundreds of illegal guns ... the lawsuit alleges that the store repeatedly broke federal gun laws and ... cites years of previously-unseen audit reports by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, showing repeat violations, warnings, and two recommendations for revocation of Westforth Sports Inc.s license to sell guns. ...

If the ATF found them to have sold "hundreds of illegal guns," I doubt there would have been only "two recommendations for revocation of Westforth Sports Inc's license to sell guns."

 

In a trial, the plaintiff is going to have to prove the store sold hundreds of guns illegally. No? Case dismissed.

 

This case is about the publicity, nothing more.

[RECarry]

Will Chicago also sue the railroads for allowing boxcar loads of guns to be stolen while transiting through town? It's never the criminals.

[gunuser17]

The case will probably not be dismissed until there has been extensive discovery including production of all of the firearm purchase documents for at least the past couple of years. The issue of how many guns were illegally sold, if any, will be part of litigation and the goal of the city most likely is to just use the cost of litigation to put the FFL out of business. The better case for dismissal for the FFL may well be that even if the City's assertions are true, the "City" itself has not suffered any damages and therefore has no standing to sue. Not sure how that might work. A better plaintiff would be someone injured by a firearm that was sold by that FFL to a straw purchaser who then transferred the gun to a criminal in Chicago that injured the "someone" in Chicago. To get jurisdiction, Chicago will probably argue that it incurs police costs or medical costs as the result of a straw purchase used in a crime in Chicago.

[Bubbacs]

2020 and 2021 federal gun charges?

Is there someone savvy enough to look this up?

You would think if there are federal gun charges in the city of Chicago we would have heard or read about it.

The only thing I see or hear is those being let out on little to no bail!

Dozens, so more than 24? Someone should fact check Groot @ the door.

Isn’t she rumored to have worked out a deal to hide/toss a gun charge for someone, just asking.

[Euler]

The case will probably not be dismissed until there has been extensive discovery including production of all of the firearm purchase documents for at least the past couple of years. ...

The store's inventory log is all that's needed.

 

Guns come in; serial numbers get recorded. Guns go out; 4473s get recorded.

 

The store has to produce those records every time the ATF audits it. If the records don't match, the ATF gets angry. Also the ATF already runs trace reports on all "crime" guns.

[gunuser17]

 

The case will probably not be dismissed until there has been extensive discovery including production of all of the firearm purchase documents for at least the past couple of years. ...

The store's inventory log is all that's needed.

 

Guns come in; serial numbers get recorded. Guns go out; 4473s get recorded.

 

The store has to produce those records every time the ATF audits it. If the records don't match, the ATF gets angry. Also the ATF already runs trace reports on all "crime" guns.

 

Except that is not how discovery works in litigation. The lawyers will have the right to look at and get copies of any and all sales documents that are maintained by the store that reflect any sale or purchase of a firearm or identify a purchaser or seller (as I suspect the store buys used firearms). The store will also have to produce all of their emails that relate to sales or purchases or inquiries relating to firearms along with a host of electronic records from their vendors/distributors. Ask anyone that has been through the ringer in civil litigation and the ability to discover information is very broad.

[richp]

Gunuser identified the heart of the matter.

 

Burden the defendant with such extensive and elaborate, (and costly), document production requirements, and just the threat of such expensive, time-consuming litigation will begin to strangle not just this one dealer, but firearms commerce more broadly.

 

Rich phillips

[Black Flag]

Chicago files suit in civil court in cook Co against a gun store in Indiana.

 

LOL sure, make noise.

[JTHunter]

Gunuser identified the heart of the matter.

In other words, the city is mainly after the names and addresses of purchasers, esp. those that may live in the city and may not have "registered" their purchases. Is that right?

[Euler]

 

 

The case will probably not be dismissed until there has been extensive discovery including production of all of the firearm purchase documents for at least the past couple of years. ...

The store's inventory log is all that's needed.

 

Guns come in; serial numbers get recorded. Guns go out; 4473s get recorded.

 

The store has to produce those records every time the ATF audits it. If the records don't match, the ATF gets angry. Also the ATF already runs trace reports on all "crime" guns.

 

Except that is not how discovery works in litigation. The lawyers will have the right to look at and get copies of any and all sales documents that are maintained by the store that reflect any sale or purchase of a firearm or identify a purchaser or seller (as I suspect the store buys used firearms). The store will also have to produce all of their emails that relate to sales or purchases or inquiries relating to firearms along with a host of electronic records from their vendors/distributors. Ask anyone that has been through the ringer in civil litigation and the ability to discover information is very broad.

 

Discovery does not extend to privileged information. I'm pretty sure personally identifiable information of innocent parties counts as privileged.

[ragsbo]

So they hope to close the store by suing them out of business due to the cost of the legal process!

[gunuser17]

Personally identifiable information has nothing to do with privilege. Privilege only has to do with attorney-client communications. Personally identifiable information is produced in civil litigation all of the time. Such information is often redacted in some way in open court filings but the parties can still make full use of the documents. The court would typically enter a protective order that specifies the information that is exchanged during the law suit that cannot be publically disclosed. Even that information often is disclosed during the actucal course of a trial since very seldom is the courtroom closed to the public during a trial.

 

 

[defaultdotxbe]

 

Gunuser identified the heart of the matter.

In other words, the city is mainly after the names and addresses of purchasers, esp. those that may live in the city and may not have "registered" their purchases. Is that right?

 

I believe there are 4th amendment issues with the city using the data in that way. Also, the city no longer has any registration or permitting requirements beyond the FOID

 

Although the reference to handguns lead me to believe this is mostly IN residents purchasing the guns and trafficking them to IL. If the store was indeed negligent and engaging in fraudulent record keeping as the suit alleges, they could certainly be found liable, but I'm not sure the city has standing in this case. I would think they would need to find someone who was an actual victim of a criminal using one of these guns. "Contributing to a public nuisance" is pretty weak sauce IMO

[Jeffrey]

I gotta hand it to Chicago. A city where they solve a crime less than 20% of the time has the ability to figure out a gun shop in Indiana is the source of their problems. A city full of clout that never catches a corrupt politician can do a better job investigating a business in another state than an alphabet soup group. This will surely put a halt to crime in the city. Well done Kimmy!

[Bubbacs]

Removed

[yurimodin]

what "judge" is even entertaining this.......this is a matter for the useless FBI or ATF who probobly already told the Chicastro bureaucrats to buzz off.

[Euler]

what "judge" is even entertaining this...

Cases are assigned randomly. Judges don't take them. Anyone can sue anyone else at anytime for anything. Whether it goes anywhere is a separate matter.

[mab22]

So they hope to close the store by suing them out of business due to the cost of the legal process!

That sums it up nice and succinctly.

[Colt guy]

 

So they hope to close the store by suing them out of business due to the cost of the legal process!

 

That sums it up nice and succinctly.

Nice to have a blank taxpayer funded checkbook.