Parents of Sandy Hook tragedy file wrongful death claims

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

(FILES) Balloons hang on a sign at the entrance to Sandy Hook School (AFP PHOTO / DON EMMERT)

NEWTOWN – The parents of 10 children killed in the Sandy Hook tragedy are preparing to file – or have already filed – wrongful death claims on their children’s behalf, according to the Hartford Courant. The forms, filed in probate court, open an estate in each child’s name, and are a mandatory step that must be taken before filing a lawsuit.

The Courant reported that the first estate was opened last week, followed by eight estates on Monday. A tenth estate is in the process of being reopened. The probate filings do not specify against whom a lawsuit might be filed.

According to the Courant, several of the victims’ families have met with lawyers to discuss a possible lawsuit against Bushmaster, the manufacturer of the gun used by Adam Lanza. Other possible parties being considered include Nancy Lanza’s estate, the insurance company holding the policy for Nancy Lanza’s home, or the Town of Newtown because of school safety issues on the day of the tragedy.

Under Connecticut law, the families have until Sunday to present the lawsuit to a state marshal. That marshal then has 30 days to serve the parties named in the suit.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


  • Ken Culbertson

    Anti-gun crusaders seem worried about the advent of a Republican administration. Heaven knows why. Republicans, in recent years, have managed to do nearly as much damage to the Second Amendment as Democrats. In 1969, journalist William Safire asked Richard Nixon what he thought about gun control. “Guns are an abomination,” Nixon replied. According to Safire, Nixon went on to confess that, “Free from fear of gun owners’ retaliation at the polls, he favored making handguns illegal and requiring licenses for hunting rifles.” It was President George Bush, Sr. who banned the import of “assault weapons” in 1989, and promoted the view that Americans should only be allowed to own weapons suitable for “sporting purposes.” It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, “prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one’s person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street.” The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners. Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. “I support the Brady Bill,” he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, “and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay.” One of the most aggressive gun control advocates today is Republican mayor Rudolph Giuliani of New York City, whose administration sued 26 gun manufacturers in June 2000, and whose police commissioner, Howard Safir, proposed a nationwide plan for gun licensing, complete with yearly “safety” inspections.
    Another Republican, New York State Governor George Pataki, on August 10, 2000, signed into law what The New York Times called “the nation’s strictest gun controls,” a radical program mandating trigger locks, background checks at gun shows and “ballistic fingerprinting” of guns sold in the state. It also raised the legal age to buy a handgun to 21 and banned “assault weapons,” the sale or possession of which would now be punishable by seven years in prison.
    Gun control crusaders argue that the Republicans are simply yielding to grassroots pressure, to gain political advantage. But polls show little evidence of such pressure. A Gallup/CNN/USA Today survey taken in June 1999 – only two months after the Littleton massacre – showed that the number of Americans who favored stricter gun laws had declined by 20 percent since 1990. Public support for gun control has dwindled even further since then. An Associated Press poll released on the one-year anniversary of the Littleton shootings shows that Americans favor strict enforcement of existing laws over new gun laws – the exact position of the National Rifle Association (NRA) – by 42 to 33 percent.
    That same month, a survey by the Pew Research Center showed that only 6 percent of Americans believed that tougher gun laws would prevent future school shootings. Meanwhile, a Tarrance Group poll has shown that only 5 percent of Americans want gunmakers and gun dealers held responsible for misuse of firearms. Clearly, the pressure for gun control is not coming from the grassroots. It comes from those layers of society that the left calls the “ruling classes” – academics, Hollywood stars, Washington insiders and multibillion-dollar media conglomerates. The latter are particularly influential in pushing anti-gun propaganda. A study by the Media Research Center released in January 2000 showed that television news stories calling for stricter gun laws outnumbered those opposing such laws by a ratio of 10 to 1. The blame for this media bias is traditionally assigned to “liberal journalists.” And, indeed, most journalists do hold left-of-center views. A 1996 survey of working journalists by the Roper Center and the Freedom Forum showed that 89 percent had voted for Bill Clinton in 1992. Only 4 percent identified themselves as Republicans and only 2 percent as conservatives. Yet, their “liberal” views probably have less impact on the media’s anti-gun bias than most people assume. Rank-and-file reporters have little power to influence the political spin even of their own stories.
    Liberal news organizations are no different. Political bias comes from the top. Rank-and-file reporters simply do what they are told. Those of us who cherish our Second Amendment rights are keeping our fingers crossed. But the monolithic commitment America’s “ruling classes” have shown toward gun control makes one wonder whether even a president is free to buck the current.

    • Gene Ralno

      You’re absolutely correct. I’d add that the problem is as old as homo sapiens. Today, we know it as big government, a clear goal of democrat politicians and one that’s camouflaged by republicans. It’s the reason both parties hate and fear the TEA folks and their movement. But experienced beltway politicians know it’s not about public safety, general welfare or even the greater good. It’s about oppressing conservatives and their principles. To retain their lavish status, they know they have to keep tabs on their enemies. So they create massive systems of records on them with clever schemes such as “universal background checks.” They wish to record conservative activities again and again, when they buy a firearm, loan one, gift one, sell one and on and on. These records are more commonly known as “registers” or “registration.” They also know it won’t work to their advantage unless they eventually move to confiscation. Otherwise what’s the point of keeping all these records on lawful citizens? The bad guys already are prohibited and simply violate the law. Nixon clearly was afraid. And Clinton was the king of manipulation. I never quite understood how Reagan and Bush fell to the indoctrination. Both of them were great statesmen but let’s face it, Reagan’s background largely was from the perspective of Hollywood. And Bush 41 was a career politician.

    • Don

      For the outspoken gun control diehards “” is available at… or for the gun toting enthusiast so is “”.

  • Brandon

    So what’s next are they going to start lawsuits against Jack Daniels for drunk driving fatalities? I understand the parents anger and grief over the loss of their child it made me angry but should they be holding the school responsible for not taking measures to keep those kids safe!