HIGH COURT ROUNDUP: New York Fails To Revive Gun Lawsuit
09 Marzo 2009 - 8:47AM
Noticias Dow Jones
New York City on Monday failed before the U.S. Supreme Court to
revive a lawsuit it filed against the gun industry.
New York sued several gun manufacturers in 2000, arguing the
companies violated a state public nuisance law with their marketing
and distribution of the firearms products they sell. Among the
companies sued were Beretta USA Corp., Smith & Wesson Holding
Corp. (SWHC), Colt's Manufacturing Co. LLC, Sturm, Ruger & Co.
(RGR) and Glock GmbH.
A federal law enacted in 2005 sought to shield gun makers from
lawsuits like the one New York filed, prompting a federal judge to
throw the case out. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New
York in April 2008 upheld that ruling by a 2-1 vote.
New York, in a court brief, said the 2005 law violates state
rights under the U.S. Constitution. "This congressional effort to
control how states make law raises important questions about the
Tenth Amendment's protections of state sovereignty," New York
said.
The gun manufacturers, in a joint legal brief, said the federal
appeals court correctly applied the 2005 statute and argued the law
does not violate the Constitution. "This case does not qualify for
Supreme Court review," the gun makers said.
The case is New York v. Beretta, 08-530.
In other Supreme Court action:
- The justices let stand a federal appeals ruling that said
Thomson Reuters Corp. (TRI) didn't infringe on a patent related to
online municipal-bond auctions.
A federal trial court in 2006 ordered Thomson to pay $77 million
in damages and found the company had infringed on a patent held by
Pittsburgh-based MuniAuction for software related to muni-bond
trading.
The Federal U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, a
special patent appeals court, overturned the patent judgment last
year. The case is MuniAuction Inc. v. Thomson Corp., 08-847.
- The high court rejected a bid from Apotex Inc. to overturn a
lower court holding that its generic version of Prilosec, a
heartburn medication, infringed on AstraZeneca PLC (AZN)
patents.
Apotex, based in North York, Ontario, is one of several
companies sued by AstraZeneca over generic versions of Prilosec.
Lower courts ruled Apotex had violated patents on the drug, which
lost patent protection in 2002.
The case is Apotex v. AstraZeneca AB, 08-867.
- The justices told lower courts to review the status a case
against drug manufacturers, in light of its 6-3 ruling last week in
Wyeth v. Levine that pharmaceutical aren't immune from product
liability lawsuits filed in state courts.
The lawsuit deals with whether several pharmaceutical companies
should have warned about the increased suicide risk antidepressants
can have for some patients. That case, brought by the families of
two people who killed themselves while taking antidepressants in
2003, involves GlaxoSmithKline PLC's (GSK) Paxil, Pfizer Inc.'s
(PFE) Zoloft and Apotex's generic version of Paxil.
A federal appeals court in Philadelphia ruled Food and Drug
Administration oversight of prescription drugs bars the lawsuits.
The FDA has been active in reviewing and requiring warning and
labeling statements for antidepressants.
-By Mark H. Anderson, Dow Jones Newswires, 202 862-9254;
mark.anderson@dowjones.com