How does this affect the SAFE act and the 29th court date? I'm assuming this will have nothing to do with rifles or am I wrong?
Max, even though the Lewis incident doesn't seem to have any direct relationship to the core of either Dywinski or Holtz, might it eventually influence the outcomes of either of those cases?
Have you considered filing a complaint under violation of the HIPAA privacy provision with the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, on behalf of your client David Lewis. You have 180 days of the time the violation occurred. I believe it could fall under the following statutes;
SEC. 1177 "WRONGFUL DISCLOSURE OF INDIVIDUALLY IDENTIFIABLE HEALTH INFORMATION
SEC 1178 does not afford NY any of the state exceptions, in this case, for SEC 1177, which protect state laws contrary to federal privacy law.
This would allow the federal government to investigate what in fact happened in David's situation, would cost your client nothing, and could also provide you with information that could assist you in your civil suit.
We may know as soon as Monday whether or not Kachalsky v. Cacace will be/has been set down for oral argument in the United States Supreme Court. As I have indicated before, the New York State Supreme Court is looking to Kachalsky for guidance in Dywinski and Holtz. No cliffhanger here with regards to these cases, but Monday is going to be an important for all sides of these cases.
Certiorari denied, we're going to court.
Folks, please take time to read the thread before posting so we don't end up with 50 pages of repeated questions and answers and get yet another valuable thread closed.
I know you said a number of times the NY Supreme Court was looking to SCOTUS for guidance in this case. How much of an effect do you think the denial of Cert will have on the Holtz and other cases? Will it be fairly measurable, or mostly insignificant? and could it be positive in some ways?
Thanks, and keep up the work!
We are not doing this again. I have too much work to try and sort through a cesspool of a thread. I will - if I can - respond to questions directed at me. Some questions - those asking to disclose strategy, release the name of a confidential informant, etc - will not be answered. Please do not answer questions that are directed to me, it only adds to the confusion. Sorry.
I will add to what Max said that we will discuss options about further threads. No one should really blame Max or James for losing patience with NYF. It is getting annoying for the legal team that is trying to keep everyone informed while they are quite busy, just to have a bunch of yahoos attack and criticize the team about legal issues that they do not even understand.
i would say that we are at two strikes here. The usual rule is three strikes and you're out. I will not post any information about what the legal team is doing if Tresmond Law decides to stop posting information. Take this as a final warning. Please everyone use decorum and courtesy from now on.
Can we prove that a pistol grip and or a detachable magazine is not a military feature? There are plenty of non-military rifles that use a pistol grip and century's of military rifles without a pistol grip. Has anyone tried to challenge the safe act with this yet?
Sorry for the delay in response. Was going to update earlier; locked in the NYS Supreme Court due to bomb threat.
We are waiting on a pretrial conference date for Holtz.
Dywinski is scheduled for a pre-trial conference on May 13th.
Thanks for the news Max. Can you update us on the status of the April 29 deadline? In other words, are we still on schedule for possible injunction on 4/29?
Max - will what happened yesterday in Washington with the federal stuff not passing be helpful in throwing out the NY Safe Act? I would think it makes it look even more uncommon for the things in that law to stick. Thoughts?
Max, I am an FFL holder and NYS licensed dealer. The provision in the law dictating that dealers may charge no more than $10 for conducting the newly required background check on all private sales seems blatantly unconstitutional to me as it interferes with interstate commerce and our generally "free market" economy. I am struck how an auto shop charges anywhere from $60-$150 an hour for a mechanic to do even basic repairs on a car but the State Legislature has determined that gun dealers can only charge $10 for a process that takes on average at least 20 minutes, involves 2 persons and one firearm that must be logged onto and off of the dealer's books.
I was wondering if you know whether this part of the law is being challenged in any suit you have knowledge of.