Legal Opinion
City of Philadelphia v. Beretta U.S.A., Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided December 20, 2000No. 2:00-cv-02463PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SCHILLER, District Judge.
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.886
STANDARD FOR MOTION TO DISMISS.887
REGULATION OF FIREARMS.887
FACTS ALLEGED IN THE COMPLAINT.888
DISCUSSION.889
I.Philadelphia’s suit is barred by the Uniform Firearms Act (“UFA”).889
A. Section 6120.889
B. Section 6120(a.l) (“UFA Amendment”).890
1. Plain meaning.890
2. Impetus for statute.890
3. Legislative history.891
C. UFA Amendment is Constitutional.891
1. Federal Constitution...891
2. Pennsylvania Constitution.892
a. State may revoke municipal power. b. The City had no accrued causes of action.. D. Municipal Cost Recovery Rule.…
2Cases cited98 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
93 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Blunt v. Lower Merion School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2014
- Ileto v. Glock Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- Hamilton v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2001
- Brownell Combs, Ii, Administrator C.T.A. Of the Estate of Leslie Combs, Ii, Deceased v. International Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
- Cincinnati v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 2002
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.