Woollard v. Gallagher
Civil lawsuit / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Woollard v. Gallagher?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Woollard v. Sheridan, 863 F. Supp. 2d 462 (D. Md. 2012), reversed sub. nom., Woollard v Gallagher, 712 F.3d 865 (4th Cir. 2013), was a civil lawsuit brought on behalf of Raymond Woollard, a resident of the State of Maryland, by the Second Amendment Foundation against Terrence Sheridan, Secretary of the Maryland State Police, and members of the Maryland Handgun Permit Review Board. Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants' refusal to grant a concealed carry permit renewal to Mr. Woollard on the basis that he "...ha[d] not demonstrated a good and substantial reason to wear, carry or transport a handgun as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger in the State of Maryland" was a violation of Mr. Woollard's rights under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments, and therefore unconstitutional.[1] The trial court found in favor of Mr. Woollard,[2] However, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review that decision.
This article needs to be updated. (November 2014) |
Woollard v. Gallagher | |
---|---|
Court | United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit |
Full case name | Raymond Woollard, et al. v. Denis Gallagher, et al. |
Argued | October 24, 2012 |
Decided | March 21, 2013 |
Citation(s) | 712 F.3d 865 |
Case history | |
Prior history | Woollard v. Sheridan, 863 F. Supp. 2d 462 (D. Md. 2012) |
Subsequent history | Cert. denied, 571 U.S. 952 (2013). |
Court membership | |
Judge(s) sitting | Robert Bruce King, Andre M. Davis, Albert Diaz |
Case opinions | |
Majority | King, joined by unanimous |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amend. II |
The case is notable as being the first direct challenge to a "may-issue" concealed carry firearms law in the United States, and also for being uncommon among challenges to U.S. firearms law in that the plaintiffs were successful in federal District Court, rather than requiring appeal to a Circuit Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court before a decision was handed down in the plaintiffs' favor.