NRA Director Proposed as Intervenor After New York Court Setback for NRA Members

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- National Rifle Association Director Roscoe B. Marshall, Jr. filed supporting papers Friday requesting oral argument for his  Notice of Motion to Intervene in the case of New York v NRA with the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Commercial Division.  The action follows a disappointment for the intervention effort when earlier this month Judge Joel Cohen denied the motion to intervene by NRA members, Frank Tait and Mario Aguirre.

“But he said the members’ cause needed to be heard, and he would consider other ways of letting them participate,” the NRA In Danger blog reported at the time. “There was a report of a director going to join in, which would have helped their motion a lot, but it sounds like there is still a chance that he will come in.”

That report came from an exclusive AmmoLand article on the case from the week before when the attorney for Tait and Aguirre informed Judge Cohen such a development was anticipated and impending.  A legal source contributing to that report asserted a director joining the effort would bolster its chances for approval.

“The Proposed Intervenor is a Director of the National Rifle Association (‘NRA’) and has the statutory right … to assert derivative claims on its behalf,” the Notice of Motion for Marshall’s inclusion declares, further asserting:

“The Proposed Intervenor has a real and substantial interest in the issues and subject matter of this action, and although he will be bound by the judgment his interests will not and cannot be adequately represented by the present parties. This action involves the disposition of tangible and intangible property, and the impairment of the Proposed Intervenor’s constitutional rights, and his interests may be affected adversely by the judgment. The Proposed Intervenor has claims and defenses that have questions of controlling law and fact in common with this action. The Proposed Intervenor seeks to assure that the NRA as an entity has independent, conflict-free counsel. The law firm presently representing the NRA is irreconcilably conflicted and the NRA is alleged by the Attorney General to be controlled by one or more of the individual defendants. Thus no present party or law firm can adequately protect the NRA’s rights as an entity separate from the individual defendants.”

Additional related filings (see #377 through #390), accessible from the court website, include:

• Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Intervene by Roscoe B. Marshall, Jr.
• Marshall’s Proposed Answer in Intervention to the Amended Complaint, With Derivative Claims, Counterclaims and Crossclaims
• Various NRA Emails and NRA Board Meeting Minutes (See AmmoLand exclusive “NRA ‘Restructuring’ and Billing Documents Show Need for Honest Stewardship”)
• Marshall’s Bio/Resume

A hearing on the motion to allow Marshall’s intervention has been requested for October 12th, 2021. Stay tuned for updates.

About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.