An article from Townhall.com which deals with the NAACP lawsuit against gun manufacturers. It goes into a little detail about the judge whom the NAACP earnestly sought to preside.
This is a brief overview of the NAACP court case.
Robert Ricker has been enlisted as a witness for the NAACP in their case.
Ricker filed an affidavit on behalf of cities & counties in California who had attempted to sue various gun manufacturers. Despite his 'insider testimony' the suit was dismissed.
For background on Ricker, look here & here.
Look here for previous posts concerning the NAACP's court case against gun manufacturers, including the amicus curiae filed by the Klu Klux Klan on behalf of the NAACP.
Of note is that the NAACP has went to great effort to have a judge known for his anti-gun bias preside over the case, the NAACP has attempted to disqualify the plantiff's attorneys by calling them as witnesses, & the judge has decided the jury will serve only in an advisory capacity leaving him to make the final decisions on liability & remedy.
Keep in mind the lawsuit seeks a judgement against the manufacturer of a legal product (which undergoes strict federal, state & local regulations) because said product has been misused in crimes by purchasers who are 2 to 3 times removed from the plantiffs in the lawsuit. gun manufacturers sell their products to distributors, who in turn sell to federally licensed (and sometimes state & locally licensed) gun dealers who then sell the product to consumers who pass certain criteria ( background check, permit to purchase arms, etc...). It is not that different than suing a steel plant because the steel they produced was used in a car part that was used in a car that was stolen.
The NAACP suit, & similar ones are nothing more than attempts to control an industry through the judiciary rather than the legislature. The reason for this is that they keep failing to enact the strict anti-gun laws they desire, so they use lawsuits to achieve the same effect. It's much easier to convince a sympathetic jury consisting of only 12 people, (or a sympathetic judge in the NAACP's case) than it is to convince 270 members of Congress.