Government
Jun. 8, 2023
State must pay plaintiff fees for challenge to firearm law
“The unilateral fee-shifting provision of 1327 was intended from the onset to chill the exercise of constitutional rights by threatening to bankrupt those that sought to protect them,” read a statement from Bill Sack, the director of legal operations at Firearms Policy Coalition, one of the plaintiffs.
A federal judge in San Diego ordered the state to pay the legal fees of plaintiffs who successfully challenged a new California law granting a private right of action against manufacturers of unlawful firearms.
U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez enjoined in December a section of Senate Bill 1327 that required plaintiffs to pay the government’s legal fees unless all of their claims prevailed in court. Miller et al. v. Bonta et al., 3:22-c...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In