A judge in Lake County, Illinois, has ruled in favor of the Highland Park parade shooting victims, allowing their lawsuits against gun manufacturer Smith & Wesson to proceed, according to a report by the Chicago Sun-Times. The victims' claims against the gunmaker focus on allegations that the company irresponsibly marketed their M&P 15 assault rifle to teenagers, despite its notoriety in several previous mass shootings.
In a historic decision on Tuesday, Judge Jorge L. Ortiz partially denied Smith & Wesson's motion to dismiss, enabling more than two dozen wrongful-death lawsuits to advance. While the court disallowed the deceptive business practices claims, the unfair business practices and negligence claims were permitted to go forward. Incorrectly placing the motion's denial in an act of historic precedence, lawyers representing the victims expressed in a statement that this decision "sends a clear message that the gun industry does not have carte blanche to engage in irresponsible marketing of assault rifles."
Furthermore, the judge also ruled against motions to dismiss by Red Dot Arms and Bud’s Gun Shop, where the shooter, Robert Crimo III, obtained the M&P 15 rifle used in the massacre. On July 4, 2022, Crimo III unleashed terror on a parade in downtown Highland Park, killing seven and wounding dozens more. According to ABC7 Chicago, last month, he pleaded guilty to murder and attempted murder charges.
Attorney Josh Koskoff, representing Eduardo Uvaldo's family, told ABC7 Chicago, "Tragically, Mr. Uvaldo's life ended on Independence Day in what has also become an American tradition-innocent victims murdered in mass shootings carried out with a weapon of war. It's about time that Smith & Wesson answers for its actions."
Twenty-five lawsuits were filed on behalf of 79 survivors. They argue that Smith & Wesson's marketing strategies targeted younger audiences despite the M&P 15's known association with mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado; San Bernardino, California; Parkland, Florida; and Poway, California. Currently, a trial date has not been set, but the next court hearing in the case is scheduled for May 1.
