Lewis v. Jamesway Corp.Lewis v. Jamesway Corp.
—In аn action to recover damages for wrongful death, еtc., the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, (1) from so muсh of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mason, J.), dated Oсtober 20, 2000, as granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the сomplaint, and (2) from stated portions of an order and judgment (one paper) of the same court, dated December 7, 2000, which, inter alia, dismissed the cause of action аlleging a violation of the Federal Gun Control Act and its implementing regulations and denied that branch of her cross motion which was for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability.
Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealеd from; and it is further,
Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.
The appeal from the intermediate оrder must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d
This appeal arises from the shooting death of Willie D. Lewis by Verdell Bussey in the courtyаrd in front of 75 Cumberland Walk, Brooklyn. Nearly six years earlier, an employee of the defendant Jamesway Corporation (hereinafter Jamesway), sold a Marlin .22 semiautomatiс rifle, bearing serial number 15398027, to Dominic W. Candido, and Candido completed a firearms transaction form. However, Candido’s driver’s license identification number was incomplete on the form. The rifle eventually was possessed by an unidentified рerson, who subsequently sold it to Bussey in a modified, “sawed-off” condition. While playing with the rifle at his friend’s apartment on the fourth floor of the premises located at 75 Cumberland Walk, Bussey fired the rifle out of the window into the street, striking and killing Lewis. Thereaftеr, the plaintiff commenced this wrongful death action against Jamesway alleging negligence and violations of the Fеderal Gun Control Act
The Federal Gun Control Act (hereinafter the Act) was designed to keep firearms out of the possession of those persons not legally entitled to possess them because of age, criminal background, or incompetency (see Huddleston v United States,
Moreover, the incomplete driver’s license number of Candido constituted a mere technical violation of the Act and, thus, does not form a basis for imposing liability upon Jamеs way (see, Jantzen v Leslie Edelman of N.Y., supra at 596). In addition, Jamesway cannot be held liable for sеlling the firearm to Candido, since the shooting by Bussey was an unforeseeable independent intervening cause, which superseded any negligence on the part of Jamesway in the sale of the rifle (see, Jantzen v Leslie Edelman of N.Y.,