Families of nine victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre agreed Tuesday to a $73 million settlement against the maker of the gun used in the deadly 2012 shooting.
The settlement follows several years of litigation with Remington Arms, the maker of the Bushmaster AR-15-style rifle that was used to kill 20 first graders and six teachers in 2012 at the elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut.
As part of the settlement, Remington has also agreed to allow the families to release documents they obtained during the lawsuits, including ones that show how the gunmaker marketed the weapon, said Joshua Koskoff, lead attorney representing the families, at a Tuesday news conference.
“From the beginning, it was not about money,” Koskoff said. “It was about getting answers, learning about these decisions.”
“The linchpin of this settlement is that it allows these families the right to share the information as to what they learned,” he added.
Remington had previously offered the victims’ families $33 million in a possible settlement last year. Koskoff told USA TODAY in August that this offer was “grossly inadequate.”
EARLIER:Gunmaker Remington offers $33M settlement to Sandy Hook families
The lawsuit tested the scope of a federal law that grants gun manufacturers broad immunity from lawsuits stemming from crimes committed with their products. The case has been closely watched by gun manufacturers, as well as gun legislation experts who have said the suit could shatter long-held perceptions about gunmakers’ ability to resist lawsuits related to criminal use of guns they make.
The civil court case in Connecticut hinged on how Remington marketed the rifle, accusing the gunmaker of targeting young, at-risk men through product placement in violent video games and ads, including one that used the phrase “Consider You Man Card Reissued.”
The victims’ family members argued Remington violated Connecticut’s unfair trade practices law when it “knowingly marketed and promoted the Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle for use in assaults against human beings,” according to the lawsuit.
“The marketing essentially glorifies violence and the military use of the weapon to young men,” Koskoff previously told USA TODAY.
Remington’s lawyers have denied the allegations in court and argued that there is no evidence to show Remington’s marketing had anything to do with the shooting.
Remington did not respond Tuesday morning to requests for comment.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case after it had already taken multiple turns, including bouncing from a state superior court to the state Supreme Court and back.