Legal Opinion

Camden County Board of Chosen Freeholders v. Beretta, U.S.A. Corp.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided November 16, 2001No. 01-1051UnknownCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

2Per curiam

The Camden County Board of Chosen Freeholders (hereinafter “Camden County”) contends that handgun manufacturers, because of their marketing and distribution policies and practices, are liable under a public nuisance theory for the governmental costs associated with the criminal use of handguns in Camden County. The District Court, in a 53-page opinion, dismissed the complaint. See Camden County Board of Chosen Freeholders v. Beretta U.S.A., Corp., 123 F.Supp.2d. 245 (D.N.J.2000). We affirm the order of the District Court.

I

In its Second Amended Complaint, Camden County…

3Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Merrill v. Navegar, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Hamilton v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2001
  3. Philadelphia Electric Company v. Hercules, Inc. And Gould, Inc. Appeal of Hercules, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
  4. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey v. Arcadian Corp Dyno Nobel Inc, F/k/a, Ireco Incorporated Hydro Agri North America, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
  5. Ganim v. Smith & Wesson Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2001

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

4Cited by8 opinions

  1. Cincinnati v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 2002
  2. City of Gary Ex Rel. King v. Smith & Wesson Corp.Indiana Supreme Court · 2003
  3. In Re Firearm CasesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
  4. Camden County Board of Chosen Freeholders v. BerettaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2001
  5. Horace Claiborne, Sonjia Monique Bowlin, Tyshawn Walker, Willie Seals, Frederick Eppich, Jerome Schoolfield, Kristina Travis, Jeremy Winkels, Daniel Forrester, Mark David Griffeth, Douglas Russell, Kenneth Burton, Gerald Gensoli, and Thomas Deppiesse, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated v. FedEx Ground Package Systems, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2025

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API