The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Colin Ferguson, a true nut cake, (if you saw him on court TV you know what a little weasel he truly is) boarded a commuter train and opened fire on the passengers. Six people were killed, and nineteen others were wounded in the vicious attack. Ferguson was armed with a 9mm semiautomatic handgun which was loaded with Black Talon bullets. This bullet was designed to enhance the severity of any wound it caused. Ps sued the manufacturer alleging negligent manufacture, advertising, and marketing of a product that was unreasonably designed and ultrahazardous, the making of an unreasonably dangerous product and strict liability in tort. D moved to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The district court granted the motion. D owed no duty to Ps to protect them from criminal misuse of the Black Talon ammunition. In strict liability Ps failed to allege the existence of a design defect in the Black Talon because the ammunition must by its very nature be dangerous to be functional. The risk of the Black Talon arises from the function of the product, not from a defect in the product. The court noted that to state a claim in either negligence or strict liability, Ps must demonstrate that D's breach was the proximate cause of their injuries. Here, Ferguson's conduct was an extraordinary act which broke the chain of causation. This appeal resulted.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.