- Quickdraw McLaw
- 48 Comments
- 159 Views
- The Vegas Golden Knights have their home opener tonight. Details about where you can watch are here.
- Details about the timeline for the Route 91 shooting are changing. [LA Times]
- Anything else going on out there?
Eglet's filed a lawsuit against SlideFire, the manufacturers of bump-stocks. Because Eglet.
There are two firms involved – Eglet Prince and "Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence" with pro-hac-vice application pending. Nevada's in the big times now with a DC firm using us for its agenda.
On an unrelated note – why does EgletPrince still use 'eservice@egletwall.com' as it's pleading email?
A PDF of the complaint is available here: http://bit.ly/2i0XRXz
So many times… a lawsuit is the only way to effect change. I'm sure you can think of a few over the last 100 years.
Everyone knows that Scotti is a 2nd Amendment advocate, right?
You figure they'll just preempt him, right?
Anyone have any info on who may be defense counsel?
My guess is Snell or LRRC or another firm with high-stakes products liability experience, with an out of town firm pro hac'd in.
Who's taking odds that this gets removed if Eglet preempts Scotti?
Whoever gets defense better remove it ASAP, you can't have this class action in state court.
11:31-my guess is you're looking at this backward. I would bet this goes to Shook or Sidley or Quinn or another top national products liability firm with the local firm being whoever they use as local counsel.
Haven't seen the complaint but I'm guessing there are non-diverse defendants included?
The complaint is linked above. You've got three Nevada residents as named Plaintiffs, and Slide Fire, a Texas corporation. Also, Doe defendants, but Does can't defeat diversity.
Interesting. Would have thought they would loop in some local retailers or something.
Also, if the class action is for more than 5 million, you can get federal jurisdiction under CAFA.
Also, fun fact, the defendant doesn't need to provide evidence of the $5 million. Just has to allege it. Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Company, LLC, v. Owens
Eglet's biggest challenge will be keeping this in state court, where he essentially owns the place. Just ask Teva Pharmaceuticals.
NRS 41.131. And now the fight begins over whether the manufacturer of an accessory to a firearm would be covered.
That will be interesting to watch. It's much like whether an automobile brake rotor would fall in under an automobile protection statute (assuming one existed). A rotor is not an automobile, but once attached becomes part of it. The bump stock would be the same. By itself it is not a firearm or ammunition, but once attached it becomes a part of the firearm.
I suspect this will ultimately be decided, in whichever direction, by political beliefs rather than a detached statutory and legal analysis.
I'm an attorney in Nevada, I'm pro 2A, and I own ~20 guns including a few incorrectly described assault rifles and bought a bump-fire stock years before SlideFire shut down the low-end manufacturer I bought mine from.
Having said that – the definition that NRS 41 defines 'firearm' by referencing NRS 414.0355. NRS 414 also includes the words 'components of a firearm' in NRS 414.155 showing that Nevada legislators can differentiate between a 'component of a firearm' and a 'firearm.' I have a difficult time believing that a judge, pro-2A or not, is going to be able to justify stating that a bump-fire stock becomes an integral part of a statutorily defined 'firearm' so that the manufacturers are protected under NRS 41.131 when NRS 41.131 just uses the words 'manufacturers and distributors of firearms or ammunition'.
I haven't read the minutes of the discussions during arguments around NRS 41.131 back from the 1985 session but by reading the clear statute, it appears that the intent was to protect the manufacturer of a device whose primary purpose is to inflict harm on someone or some thing from being liable just because the item that they manufacturer is actually used to inflict harm on someone or some thing.
The weakness in Slide Fire's position is that they got the BATFE to approve their device using a pre-text that it was intended to make it easier for disabled or physically challenged individuals to use a gun, when every piece of marketing material they ever put out is geared towards those of us that wanted a gimmicky device to allow them to use the gun as a fully automatic gun to play with (which is actually the reason I bought it.)
I have never had a need to lay down suppression fire, and although I can't pull the trigger at 600-800 times per minute, with a 100 round split drum magazine it doesn't take long to empty if I wanted to burn through ~$40 in ammo in a minute.
I'll be following the case to see where it goes. It puts all those that manufacturer 'components of firearms' on notice that they could be sued in Nevada if their item is used to harm someone in Nevada. May not be good for trying to recruit those manufacturers into Nevada or they may refuse to sell the items to Nevada. Some people may claim that keeping those items out of Nevada is good for Nevada, some may claim that it is not good for Nevada. To each his own.
11:10, this is why I keep coming back to this blog. Good, substantive comment.
I see validity to some of the arguments on both sides of the gun issue.
That said, I will never argue the issue with 11:10. Whatever he says concerning firearms or the right to own, I will always say "You are absolutely correct, Sir!"
And someone would have to be the dumbest criminal of all time to ever attempt to break into his house. I believe it would be the last crime they ever have the opportunity to commit.
@11:10 – But didn't you see the last episode of Saturday Night Live? Obviously there is no need for you to have 20 guns! And the fact that you have 20 guns should be setting off red flags at the FBI and the ATF! You are wrong to own that many firearms and clearly you should be arrested. But there's no need for me to get into any legal argument to justify why I feel this way. I'm right and you're wrong. That's how these arguments work.
@1:46 – Don't you know that we're not actually allowed to have these debates? The 2A means no public discussions that could lead to less gun deaths. Especially not after a mass shooting, until the NRA says it's ok.
All I know is that I agree with 1:03 that 11:10 is to be highly respected, and in fact, should be feared.
After 2:10 re-reads the post by 11:10, 2:10 will refrain from such sarcasm in order to make their point in favor of further regulation.
Being aware of the very extensive and eclectic firearm and accessories collection of 11:10, I would limit my commentary to observing that 11:10 must be a very intelligent and handsome man.
Hopefully, other posters will also recognize that discretion is the better part of valor.
Also, 11:10 should be on the Top Ten list of worst houses in the valley for criminals to burglarize.
@11:10am here – it looks like someone took up @9:00AM's argument but using the similar federal PCLAA (Protection in Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.) See link to the RecoilWeb.com article here: http://bit.ly/2wNky3U
and the Law.Cornell.edu link to the PCLAA: http://bit.ly/2yf8Gv6
Bar results come out today!
What's your guess as to the pass rate?
I'll say 55%.
Nah. 68%.
72% overall, 86% Boyd. That's my prediction, anyway.
I thought Newly Minted was way too high but then remembered that we lowered the passing criteria this year. 70% will probably be about right.
Reading Above the Law articles on crappy bar exam stats is a favorite semi-annual pastime of mine. Does that make me a bad person?
To:12:12. No, it doesn't. It's just a normal human reaction if you express relief that you are not in the same boat. Even though I would not wish this(failing the Bar Exam) on my worst enemy, each time that the stats. are released, along with the diminished % of those who passed, I always feel relief and gratitude that when I took the exam years ago the passage rate was in the high 70's. Had it not been that high, I would now be in some other line of work–such as selling earth worms outside a bait and tackle shop.
66% unofficial pass rate. 11:11 wins the prize.
11:11 AM here. No way to prove it, but I also guessed correctly last time.
2:52, you would have passed anyway. The recent low pass rates are due to a lower average quality of test taker, not increased difficulty of the exam.
…..aaaand the state bar website is face-down fizzing like a pro basketball player in a whorehouse.
for those who didnt make it in time, any familiar names?
I would like to follow the Golden Knights, but not enough to purchase a cable subscription. What a ripoff.
Are the Golden Knights not shown on regular? Do you have to upgrade to a hockey package?
They are on NBCSN, which is a cable outlet. Not shown over the air. I would hope that, at some point, the scales tip in favor of cable cutters as more people refuse to pay for cable tv. I would probably be willing to pay $150 a year to watch the GK. That's roughly the amount I pay to stream/Chromecast an out of market NBA team that I follow. But I won't pay $150 every month for cable. No way.
I have this NBCSN channel on slingtv, but I don't think all the games will be on that channel…
The Golden Knights sold their TV rights to AT&T Sportsnet (which is also or formerly called "Root Sports"). As of 4 days ago, that network was not carried on Cox. However a deal was reached and that channel will now be carried at like Channel 311.
Trutanich and VanDyke pass the bar! AG must be so proud of them.
BIG THINGS IN STORE FOR MR. T.
Now they are finally as qualified to practice law in Nevada as their first-year deputies.
I saw Trutanich argue before Supremes and he is superb lawyer, just excellent.
actually I'm thinking of another guy in their office Tartakovsky. I haven't seen Trutanich but just looked him up and he has excellent credentials.
He's married, give it up.