Search for: "GLOCK INC."
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe:  20 results  |  100 results
12 May 10:13 am by Richard Binder
... a bid by victims of a 1999 shooting rampage at a Jewish community center in Granada Hills to sue a federally licensed gun manufacturer and a distributor. The court said the two American companies, Georgia-based Glock Inc. and RSR Wholesale Guns Seattle Inc., were protected by a law passed by Congress in 2005, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. But the court said a third company, Beijing-based China North Industries Corp., ...
The National Law Journal's L.A. Legal Pad - http://www.lalegalpad.com/
30 Oct, 2007 12:08 pm by Marcia Oddi
... . "I'm confident that we will pursue all appellate remedies available to us to stop this lawsuit." The gun manufacturers named in the lawsuit, including Beretta U.S.A. Corp., Glock Inc. and Smith & Wesson Corp., could ask for a rehearing from the appellate court or petition for a transfer to the Indiana Supreme Court. Attorneys for the city, meanwhile, will prepare for a trial in Lake County Superior Court.
The Indiana Law Blog - http://indianalawblog.com/
1 May, 2008 4:40 am by Dan Slater
... the opinion. The crux of the suit, which dates back to 2000: The city of New York sued the gun industry - including Beretta, Browning, Colt, Glock Inc. and a bunch of others - for facilitating "the movement of legally distributed handguns into illegal markets" by, among other things, facilitating "straw purchases" in which those qualified to purchase guns from the manufacturer, such as retailers, make purchases on behalf ...
Law Blog - http://blogs.wsj.com/law
6 Sep, 2007 1:30 pm
... imprinted with SWAT in big letters, camouflage pants, and black boots. They entered the Premises with guns drawn - all were armed with Glock 21 sidearms; some carried Bennelli automatic shotguns. When the officers entered the Premises, they ordered the employees to line up along the fence ... S. 72, 77 (1970). The fundamental function of these rules is to protect citizens from the "unbridled discretion [of] executive and administrative officers." Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc., 436 U.S. 307, 323 (1978).
FourthAmendment.com - http://fourthamendment.com/blog/index.php?blog=1
         
Add to your RSS Reader Add to your Google Add to your My Yahoo Add to your My MSN Add to your My AOL Add to your Feedster Add to your Newsgator Add to your Bloglines Add to your NewsBurst Add to your Rojo Add to your Pluck