Calif. City Settles in National Shooting Sports Foundation Lawsuit, Pays Legal Fees

Money Lawsuit Ammunition Cash Lawyers
Calif. City Settles in National Shooting Sports Foundation Lawsuit, Pays Legal Fees
National Shooting Sports Foundation
National Shooting Sports Foundation

NEWTOWN, Conn – -( NSSF announced this week that it and co-plaintiff City Arms East, LLC reached an agreement with the City of Pleasant Hill, Calif., to end a lawsuit challenging a 2013 ordinance that sought to impose burdensome and unlawful firearms and ammunition sales restrictions on local firearms retailers.

As a result of the settlement approved by the city council on Monday night, the City of Pleasant Hill will pay $400,000 to cover legal fees incurred by NSSF and City Arms in bringing the suit.

“We were successful in our goal to protect the ability of federally-licensed firearms retailers to open, operate and grow their businesses in the City of Pleasant Hill,” said Larry Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel.

“As we predicted when the city council made its unfortunate decision to go forward with an ordinance, which only put into place duplicative, unneeded regulation and did nothing to enhance public safety, it was very likely that taxpayers would be left paying the tab for what amounts to an unwarranted political decision to target law-abiding businesses.”

About NSSF  The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 6,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations and publishers. For more information, log on to

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dan Larsen

Extrapolating from my wife’s favorite saying, “Actions have Consequences;” I must elude to “Elections have Consequences.” The question then becomes whether the citizen-members of the Electorate in Pleasantville, CA will have enough intellect to put a stop to the wrongful use of their tax dollars, or will they continue to enhance the bottoms of the pockets of both local, and not-so-local attorneys, (the only ones who stand to gain from such litigious matters)?


The people of Pleasant Hill do not really care if this failed and since they live in the socialist enclave of the bay area, they will re-elect these bureaucrats. The bay area is so far left they likely thought this was a good idea. San Francisco did pretty much the same thing and there are no gun or ammo stores in the city or county of San Francisco now.


any bets the city idjits have done yeoman duty to keep this entire issue on the QT? How many of the “man on the street” category ever heard of this matter at all? Few, is my bet. Part of maintining the tyrannical grip is maintaining the information flow to the plebes. Most policitcans are masters at this game. Part of how they got there.


Pleasant Hill is quite a ways south of SF, not really “Bay Area” any more…. sort of in between land…… but still, California thinking does run heavy in that area.


Pleasant Hill, CA is between the better-known suburbs of Concord and Walnut Creek, approx 10 miles NE of Oakland. It is in the “East Bay” area, definitely part of the greater San Francisco Bay area. And yes, it’s still a liberal area (perhaps half a notch less so than San Francisco).


You don’t really believe that the city council of Pleasantville, CA really gives a rat’s butt about having to pay legal expenses, do you? They are spending other people’s money, not their own, which means, no pain and no real penalty. It is like having a whipping boy. The citizens might object but who cares about them, except at election time? And many of the citizens must be ignorant or worse, since they continue to elect democrats who continue to screw the citizens and the economy.


What were the ordinances that were invalidated?