The NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION has placed its trust in the Law Office of John S. Chambers and retained this law firm to litigate issues relating to the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. Contact us now at info
In 1997, this law firm argued a case before the highest court in New York State, THE NEW YORK STATE COURT OF APPEALS. This was a very important case for all New York licensed handgun owners. This Court of Appeals case involved the criminal prosecution of a target licensee who was improperly carrying his registered target handgun on his person, in violation of the rules and regulations of the NYPD Pistol License Division. This law firm successfully argued the case before the trial level,and Appellate Term, and was ultimately successful in convincing the Court of Appeals in Albany, that the licensee could not be criminally prosecuted for an administrative violation. Although the Pistol License Division could revoke his license, place his license on a period of suspension, or otherwise punish him "administratively," the Court of Appeals agreed with attorney-Chambers and found that the licensee could NOT be criminally prosecuted under Penal Law Section 400.00. This was not only a victory for this law firm, but it was a victory for every New York pistol licensee. Please note that a prior result does not guarantee a similar outcome in any new matter brought.	WHAT EXACTLY IS "PROPER CAUSE?" Over the years, the Chambers law firm has assisted those who find themselves baffled by the statutory term "proper cause," when applying for a business related carry permit in New York City. Nineteen years ago, this term was defined differently than it is today by the License Division. Fifteen years ago, it was defined differently. Even as recently as 1998, it was defined differently. Even though the definition of "proper cause" changed over the course of time, in 1985, 1991, and 1998, one could rely upon an "unwritten" understanding of the term, vis-a-vis the License Division. There was even one period where the License Division's officers would actually quote that an applicant had to deposit at least $25,000.00 a week in cash, in order to qualify. Around 1999-2000 (and this is an approximation), it suddenly became completely impossible to figure out what it would take to establish "proper cause" for a concealed handgun permit for business/commercial/professional purposes. Why was this? The answer is simple: the internal policies of the License Division seemed to become so strict and rigid, that there existed no criteria--each application was decided on a case-by-case basis. The interesting thing is, ALL applications have ALWAYS been decided by the Pistol License Division upon a case-by-case basis-- this has never changed. So, what had changed? In reality, the agenda of the License Division dramatically changed. This is evidenced by the vast reduction of total carry permits in New York City-- according to reliable news sources, the total number dropped from about 11,000 carry permits to less than 3,000. I am convinced that it is even less than this now. Why would this be? Why would the License Division change the internal policy to make it so difficult, if not impossible, to procure a concealed handgun permit? Because it can. Without challenges to these arbitrary actions--actions which have no basis in law, and which, on their face, are an abuse of discetion-- nothing changes. Fortunately, applicants, and licensees, alike, are becoming more and more frustrated by the situation, and seek resolution within the Courts.
OUR GUARANTEE.     As with any law firm you retain, we cannot (and will not) make guarantees to our clients as to the likelihood of success. We do, however, guarantee that we will decline cases which we believe could never succeed. Although in 1993, Mr. Chambers learned a hard lesson in this regard in connection with a case he almost declined as he was sure that it would not be successful. In that case, the applicant for a handgun license had been arrested on three separate occasions. All of the arrests were for alleged violent behavior. In connection with one of the arrests, the individual had been charged with felonious assault. Mr. Chambers initially declined to take the case. He was convinced that the applicant would be denied. He also believed that the NYS Supreme Court would not reverse the NYPD's action of denying the handgun license based upon a claim that the applicant failed to show he possessed the "fitness and character" for licensure. Mr. Chambers finally decided to take the case. Although the applicant was indeed denied by the Pistol License Division, when the Chambers law firm mounted a lawsuit in NYS Supreme Court, the Court held that the agency must issue this applicant his pistol permit, despite the three arrests for violent behavior. This was a very important lesson learned. Even with this major win, however, this has not stopped this law firm from declining cases where the chances of success are deemed to be so slim, as to be almost impossible--particularly, where there have been issues of domestic violence, arrests for violent behavior, or psychiatric history. We decide whether to accept a case on a case-by-case basis. Keep in mind, if the Chambers law firm does accept your case, this does not mean we guarantee success. If the Chambers law firm does accept your case, we do guarantee that you will receive unparalleled professional service, two decades of experience, and the services of an attorney with a litigating background unmatched in this speciality.	CLIENT MATTERS: 1. An applicant is denied for "psychiatric history," and "failure to disclose" this history. The Chambers law firm is retained for administrative appeal and subsequent Article 78. After fighting the matter on many fronts, including the Appellate Division, the Chambers law firm's legal strategy is successful and the applicant's pistol permit is finally in hand. 2. A criminal attorney refers his client to Mr. Chambers when his client's permit application for a pistol to be carried in connection with his job as a security officer for a NYC museum is denied based upon 3 arrests, in 1998, 1999, and 2000, for sexual abuse, assault with a criminal weapon, and trademark counterfeiting, two domestic incidents in 2001 and 2003, the moving violations on his drivers license, and a false statement on his pistol application. The Chambers law firm is retained, and appeals this determination. The administrative appeal is successful, and client is issued a pistol license by the Pistol License Division, NYPD. 3. Applicant for a pistol permit is denied based upon two recent arrests, and a less than honorable discharge from the armed forces, as well as DMV issues. Client retains the Chambers law firm in order to challenge the NYPD, Pistol License Division in NYS Supreme Court. Case is won when a Justice of the Supreme Court agrees with the Chambers law firm, and finds that the Pistol License Division acted without a rational basis. ****************************************** As with any legal matter, a prior result does not guarantee a similar outcome in a future case. And, as this law firm has done throughout its existence, we DO NOT make guarantees as to outcome, but merely put our experience, know-how, and zealousness to work for all our clients in EVERY case we accept.
DO NOT DELAY CALL THE LAW OFFICES OF JOHN S. CHAMBERS or contact us at:  gunlicensinginfo A law firm dedicated to providing professional legal services for ALL firearms licensing related matters. (212) 645-5279     Attorney Advertising.