I actually answered my own question while typing this.

 

 

I had an issue with a gun misfire years ago and got a call from an attorney asking me questions about it. Fast forward 3 years later, it turns out that they want to file a class action and want me to be the plaintiff. No work and put a few dollars in my pocket. I obviously have an issue with suing a gun manufacturer (Forget it, question answered)

 

Curious, I am not going to do it but would anyone do it?

Is it possible to get the whole story?

Bought bolt action, Flipped safety off, gun fired. No one hurt because I was following all the rules. I think manufacturer knew there was an issue but it was in so few guns, it wasnt worth making a hub-bub. They replaced the firing mechanism, but I dont even think I put 100 rounds through it, just didnt feel comfortable with it after that.

how about the gun makers counter sue you for $$$$ millions?

do you actually know what your lawyers are going to do?

how about slander?

lawyers blow.

don't get your hands dirty

how about the gun makers counter sue you for $$$$ millions?

do you actually know what your lawyers are going to do?

how about slander?

lawyers blow.

don't get your hands dirty

 

I'm pretty sure he is a lawyer himself.

 

There are all types of lawyers, some blow, some dont.

Candide hit the nail on the head, I am a lawyer, but I dont like the Plaintiff's bar and consider them ambulance chasers.

 

James Bod: There is no slanders or anything else, I know the process and what they will do. Its just stating facts about what happened and I have told 50 people already including people on this board.

 

And we dont all blow, like I said I am not doing it because I dont believe in suing gun companies and I have also done some Pro Bono to help guys out with their FIDs.

It won't be the first time for Remington. I participated in one.

 

Remington settled a class action lawsuit back in 1995 for $31.5 million for their shotgun barrels. If you had a 12 ga. shotgun made by Remington between the years 1960 and 1995, barrels on the guns were reputed to be made with inferior steel. The scope of the suit accounted for about 10 million barrels. Those who had sent in their warranty registration cards after purchase were notified by mail that they were eligible. I participated because when the suit claimed the barrels were "inferior" and might need to be replaced, that caught my attention.

 

Funny thing was, your barrel wasn't replaced, it wasn't even deemed defective, and when you received your check after the settlement, you were just cautioned to fire SAAMI-sensible loads in it and exercise caution (I.E. common sense, check for obstructions, etc.) The attorneys walked away with something like $13.5 million.

 

 

The 700 trigger issue is old news. It's resurfacing again?

Supposedly they filed suits in a few different states, I guess they are finally coming to NJ.

 

I think its headed by the woman that shot their kid in Montana.

 

I also think their is a difference between being the named plaintiff and a participant.

To the OP, what gun and model was it, my father had one that if it had a chamfered round ready to fire and the safety was on, it would fire by just changing the safety to the fire position, no finger any where near the trigger. Just can't remember the make and model.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Plaintiff's lawyer. I don't like self-hating lawyers who generalize about an entire portion of their own profession to the detriment of all of us.

BC - You may have seen this already. (This video just emphasizes to me how important it is to know where the muzzle is pointed, not so much the trigger as the problem.)

 

I would sue IF I knew the gun manufacturer knew about the issue and its severity and said screw it OR it directly caused an injury to myself or my family.

 

My mother was on a medication for two years when the pharmacy company knew it was linked to cancer. Second year she is diagnosed with cancer when my family has absolutely 0 history. Has now been through 4 diagnosed cancers, doesn't smoke or drink, drug was pulled after huge lawsuits from a massive number of users etc etc.

 

Its not cool when companies use customers as guinea pigs but my perspective is admittedly biased.

 

 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Plaintiff's lawyer. I don't like self-hating lawyers who generalize about an entire portion of their own profession to the detriment of all of us.

 

No offense if you are a member of the Plaintiff's bar and I started out doing some of it, but once you get sued for something frivolous or see clients/friends spend thousands to fight BS lawsuits, it is tough to like the Plaintiff's bar (esp as they heavily contribute to democrats) Until I can sue a Plaintiff and his attorney when they file a garbage action, the system is doesnt work. I am sure we both have war stories that would make the other see our point.

 

I am glad I asked the question, surprised at the range of answers.

BC - You may have seen this already. (This video just emphasizes to me how important it is to know where the muzzle is pointed, not so much the trigger as the problem.)

 

Great video, Parker, I never saw that. Good response by Remington. I dont trust any NBC newscast after the BS recently.