Court Opinion

ID: 9387747
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-18 20:08:07.038911+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:15.427624
License: Public Domain

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
                              WESTERN DISTRICT

 MARK AND LEAH GUSTAFSON,                         : No. 240 WAL 2022
 INDIVIDUALLY AND AS                              :
 ADMINISTRATORS AND PERSONAL                      :
 REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ESTATE OF                 : Petition for Allowance of Appeal
 JAMES ROBERT ("J.R.") GUSTAFSON                  : from the Order of the Superior Court
                                                  :
                                                  :
              v.                                  :
                                                  :
                                                  :
 SPRINGFIELD, INC. D/B/A SPRINGFIELD              :
 ARMORY AND SALOOM DEPARTMENT                     :
 STORE AND SALOOM DEPT. STORE, LLC                :
 D/B/A SALOOM DEPARTMENT STORE                    :
 AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA                 :
                                                  :
                                                  :
 PETITION OF: SPRINGFIELD, INC. D/B/A             :
 SPRINGFIELD ARMORY AND SALOOM                    :
 DEPARTMENT STORE AND SALOOM                      :
 DEPT. STORE, LLC D/B/A SALOOM                    :
 DEPARTMENT STORE                                 :

                                         ORDER

PER CURIAM

      AND NOW, this 18th day of April, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issues set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all

remaining issues. The issues, rephrased for clarity, are:

      (1)    Do respondents’ claims for damages against the manufacturer and
             seller of a firearm that was criminally or unlawfully misused by a third
             party constitute a prohibited qualified civil liability action pursuant to
             the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005, 15 U.S.C.
             §§7901-7903 (PLCAA)?
      (2)    Do respondents’ claims fail to satisfy the product defect exception to
             the PLCAA when the discharge of the firearm was caused by an
             intentional trigger pull while the firearm was pointed at another
             person and resulted in a juvenile delinquency adjudication for
             involuntary manslaughter?

      (3)    Is the PLCAA a permissible exercise of the power of Congress
             pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, or does it
             instead violate the Tenth Amendment and principles of federalism?
      Further, the applications for leave to submit amicus curiae briefs by the State of

Montana and 11 Other States, and the Philadelphia Association of Defense Counsel, are

GRANTED.

                                  [240 WAL 2022] - 2