Highlighted Cases
On June 26, 2008, the Law Firm of David G. Sigale, P.C. filed suit against the City of Chicago on behalf of four Chicago residents (Otis McDonald, Colleen Lawson, David Lawson, and Adam Orlov), the Illinois State Rifle Association and Second Amendment Foundation. The suit alleged the City’s handgun ban, in effect since 1982, prevented regular citizens from having a functional handgun in their homes for self-defense, violating the Plaintiffs’ (and all qualified Chicago residents’) Second Amendment rights. In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Plaintiffs in McDonald v. City of Chicago, holding that the Second Amendment applies fully and equally to federal, state and local governmental action. The Firm was proud to serve as co-counsel in this historic litigation.
Read the opinion of the Supreme Court here.
Attorney David G. Sigale, on behalf of the Second Amendment Foundation, the Illinois State Rifle Association, Chicago residents Rhonda Ezell, William Hespen and Joseph Brown, and Utah-based Action Target, Inc., a specialist in the construction and operation of firearms ranges, challenged the City of Chicago’s ban on firearms ranges that law-abiding persons would use for training and practice in order to better protect themselves. The Plaintiffs argued the ban was unconstitutional under the First, Second and Fourteenth Amendments.
The Firm as co-counsel won two remarkable victories in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago, first where the Court struck down Chicago’s ban on firing ranges within City limits, finding a fundamental constitutional right to train with a firearm outside of the home. Second, the Seventh Circuit struck down various zoning and age restrictions on firing ranges, which severely restricted where a range could be placed, and who could train in them. That decision concluded seven years of litigation.
Read the opinion of the court here.
MOORE V. MADIGAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF STATE OF ILLINOIS
Attorney David G. Sigale served as co-counsel to challenge the Illinois laws that prohibited the public carrying of firearms by qualified law-abiding citizens. The Plaintiffs included Illinois residents Michael Moore, Charles Hooks, Peggy Fechter and Jon Maier, as well as the groups Second Amendment Foundation, Illinois State Rifle Association, and Illinois Carry. The State’s prohibitions were alleged to be unconstitutional under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Plaintiffs that the Second Amendment applies outside the home, and struck down the State of Illinois’ ban on the public carrying of firearms. As a result, the State passed the Firearms Concealed Carry Act.
Read the final opinion of the court here.
WINBIGLER V. WARREN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY
David G. Sigale won a judgment against the Warren County Housing Authority, which barred residents from possessing firearms for self-defense, and threatened to evict them if they did. The Plaintiff was a valid FOID cardholder and wished to be able to defend himself and his home in case of a violent intruder. Sigale was able to assist the gentleman protect his Second Amendment rights, so that he would be better able to protect himself. “People do not lose their Second Amendment rights just because they are of limited means,” said Sigale. “Nobody wishes to be in need of financial assistance, but it is an indignity to make the waiver of constitutional rights a condition of government-subsidized housing.”
Read the order of judgement here.
Read newspaper article about the case here.
PLIEGO GONZALEZ V. CITY OF OMAHA, NEBRASKA
In September 2011, Attorney David G. Sigale filed suit against the City of Omaha, Nebraska on behalf of Armando Pliego Gonzalez, a lawful resident of the United States and a resident of Omaha, to challenge Omaha’s ban on non-citizens from obtaining a permit to purchase a handgun for protection and other lawful purposes. Plaintiffs also included the Second Amendment Foundation of Bellevue, Washington, and the Nebraska Firearms Owners Association. Plaintiffs challenged the purchase ban as violating Plaintiffs’ Second and Fourteenth amendment rights. In November, 2011, the District Court entered an injunction against the City, which was quickly followed by the City’s repeal of the unconstitutional law.
JACKSON V. EDEN, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY OF STATE OF NEW MEXICO
Attorney David G. Sigale filed suit against the State of New Mexico, through its Attorney General and Public Safety Director. The suit was on behalf of John W. Jackson, a lawful resident of the United States and a resident of New Mexico, and the Second Amendment Foundation. Plaintiffs challenged the State’s ban on non-citizens from obtaining a concealed carry permit for protection, as violating Plaintiffs’ Second and Fourteenth amendment rights. The Court agreed, and entered a permanent injunction against the prohibition. This case followed on the heels of Sigale’s successful suit in Omaha, Nebraska in 2011, which barred non-citizens from obtaining a permit for home handgun possession. In that suit, Sigale obtained an injunction against the law, which the City was then forced to repeal.
According to Sigale, “This is a wonderful victory that shows how arbitrary discrimination against people who are lawfully in the Country, and who are law-abiding and have strong community ties to boot, has no place. Such persons cannot be deprived of their right to self-defense and defense of their families.”
Read the finding of facts and conclusion of law here.
KNUTSON V. CURRY, SHERIFF OF FLATHEAD COUNTY, MONTANA
The Law Firm of David G. Sigale prevailed in a lawsuit challenging the enforcement of a Montana state statute barring non-citizens from carrying concealed firearms for self-defense. Sigale obtained a preliminary injunction against the law, which the Montana State Legislature then repealed.
In the case of Lenka Knutson v. Curry, the United State District Court Judge held that the statute violated the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection rights of the Plaintiffs. According to Sigale, “This is yet another example of how arbitrary discrimination against people who are lawfully in the Country, and who are law-abiding and have strong community ties to boot, will continue to be challenged in Court. As in the other cases where this law firm has successfully challenged such discrimination, the Plaintiffs in this case cannot be deprived of equal rights to self-defense.”
Read the order of the court here.
NINO DE RIVERA LAJOUS V. SANKEY, SUPERINTENDENT OF THE NEBRASKA STATE PATROL
The Law Firm of David G. Sigale obtained a permanent injunction against the enforcement of a Nebraska statute barring non-citizens from carrying concealed firearms or self-defense. The United State District Court Judge held that the statute violated the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection rights of the Plaintiffs. Sigale said “the state also tried to justify the restriction by pointing to an alleged increase in administrative difficulties and costs of processing their applications, but the court rejected those rationales. Under the Fourteenth Amendment’s ‘equal protection’ guarantee, lawful resident aliens are protected like citizens.”
Read the final judgement here.
WILLIAMS ADV. STATE OF NEBRASKA
David G. Sigale appeared in state court in Lincoln, Nebraska to defend a man accused of violating a municipal ordinance banning firearm possession, even in the home, with certain past convictions. The man’s prior conviction – having a pocket knife that was 1/8th inch too long. Sigale filed a brief challenging the constitutionality of the ordinance, and at trial the prosecutor dropped the case, along with the claim for forfeiture of the man’s valuable firearms collection. Sigale was quoted as saying “This wrongful prosecution should never have begun. We are pleased that Mr. Williams is out of criminal jeopardy, and that the government has relinquished its forfeiture claim on Mr. William’s constitutionally protected property. This is a reminder that the Constitution and Second Amendment apply all throughout Nebraska.”
Read more about the case here.
POT V. WITT, DIRECTOR OF THE ARKANSAS STATE POLICE
Attorney David G. Sigale filed suit against the State of Arkansas, through its Director of the State Police, on behalf of Martin Pot, a lawful resident of the United States and a resident of Arkansas, and the Second Amendment Foundation, to challenge the State’s ban on non-citizens from obtaining a concealed carry permit for self-protection. Plaintiffs are challenging the permit prohibition as violating Plaintiffs’ Second and Fourteenth amendment rights. This case followed Sigale’s successful suits in New Mexico and Nebraska, where Sigale also obtained injunctions against bars on non-citizens from obtaining concealed-carry permits.
In the case of Martin Pot v. Witt, the United State District Court Judge held that the statute violated the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection rights of the Plaintiffs. According to Sigale, “This is another example of how arbitrary discrimination against people who are lawfully in the Country, and who are law-abiding and have strong community ties to boot, will continue to be challenged in Court. The Plaintiffs in this case cannot be deprived of equal rights to self-defense.”
Read the complaint here.
VEASEY V. WILKINS, SHERIFF OF COUNTY, GRANVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA
Attorney David G. Sigale filed suit against a North Carolina law, through a local Sheriff’s Office. The suit was on behalf of Felicity M. Todd Veasey, a lawful resident of the United States and a resident of North Carolina, and challenged a ban on non-citizens from obtaining a concealed carry permit for self-protection. The Court agreed to ban violated the Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment rights, and enjoined the ban.
Read the complaint here.
JUCHA V. CITY OF NORTH CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
The Firm successfully represented a local body art business in its quest to obtain a business license in North Chicago, which was denied purely as an objection to the activity of tattooing and body art. During the litigation, the Firm obtained the first opinion in an Illinois federal Court holding that the art and business of tattooing are protected First Amendment activity.
Read the opinion of the court here.
P&P AUTO AND TRUCK REPAIR, INC. ADV. AMERICAN SERVICE INSURANCE COMPANY
The Firm represented a pair of DuPage County businesses, defending them against their Insurance company, which had brought a declaratory action seeking a judgment that it was not required to defend or indemnify the businesses in a very large personal injury lawsuit. Had the businesses lost the suit, they would have had to declare bankruptcy and go out of business due to the likely injury verdict. Fortunately, after a trial the Judge ruled in favor of the businesses.
RADICH V. GUERRERO, COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC SAFETY FOR COMMONWEALTH OF NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS
The Firm successfully represented David and Li-Rong Radich, a couple in the American Territory of the Commonwealth of Northern Marianas Islands, who had experienced a violent break-in at their home and wished to obtain a firearm for defensive purposes. As Sigale described the case: “the residents of the NMI not only have the right to defend themselves with a firearm, but also to possess the most-commonly used firearm for self-defense purposes, and the NMI unconstitutionally bans both of these. The Supreme Court has held that the Second Amendment protects both an individual fundamental right to self-defense, and to possess a handgun for that purpose. We are confident the Court will agree that the NMI’s bans on these rights are unconstitutional and cannot stand.”
The Court agreed with the Plaintiffs and struck down the CNMI’s handgun ban, the ban on armed self-defense, and the discriminatory ban on lawful resident aliens obtaining a firearms license. The Firm was pleased to protect the civil rights of the Radiches, even if it meant crossing the globe.
Read the decision and order of the court here.
SIGALE FIRM FILES SUIT IN MISSOURI TO PROTECT FOSTER PARENTS’ SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS
The Law Firm of David G. Sigale has filed suit in federal Court in the Western District of Missouri in Kansas City to overturn restrictions on the Second Amendment rights of foster parents. The challenged restrictions prohibit the basic right to armed self-defense of a foster family, whether parents, natural children, or foster children. The Plaintiffs are James and Julie Attaway, a licensed Missouri foster couple, and the Second Amendment Foundation, which has supported the Firm in litigating this issue in Oklahoma, Illinois, and Michigan. Prohibiting the responsible exercise of the Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights is especially ironic in Missouri, where such rights are explicitly protected by the state Constitution in addition to the U.S. Constitution.
The complaint can be read here.