By Jonathan Stempel (Reuters) -A U.S. appeals court on Friday revived a lawsuit seeking to hold firearms maker Sig Sauer liable to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer who was injured when his P320 gun went off accidentally during a training drill. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said a trial judge […]
Politics
Sig Sauer must face ICE officer’s lawsuit over accidental gun firing
Audio By Carbonatix
By Jonathan Stempel
(Reuters) -A U.S. appeals court on Friday revived a lawsuit seeking to hold firearms maker Sig Sauer liable to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer who was injured when his P320 gun went off accidentally during a training drill.
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said a trial judge erred by dismissing Keith Slatowski’s lawsuit after excluding testimony from two experts about whether the gun’s design could cause injury.
Sig Sauer and its lawyer did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The company has faced several lawsuits over alleged unintentional P320 firings.
Slatowski’s gun discharged from within its holster after his hand hit the grip in September 2020 at a New Castle, Delaware firing range. A bullet went through his upper right hip and out his thigh.
While unsure whether debris or the holster itself caused the trigger to depress, the former Marine said the lack of an external safety to prevent unexpected firings made his gun unsafe. Slatowski sought $10 million in damages.
Writing for a three-judge appeals court panel, Circuit Judge Stephanos Bibas said the trial judge properly excluded testimony from the two experts about whether Slatowski’s gun caused his injury, because they hadn’t done testing.
But the appeals court said testimony about possible design flaws should have been admitted.
It returned the case to U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick in Philadelphia for a possible trial.
“The P320’s design is technical and probably needs explaining,” Bibas wrote. “From there, … Slatowski must rely on his lay eyewitness testimony. It may not prove persuasive. But that is up to the jury, not the judge.”
Slatowski’s wife is also a plaintiff. Their lawyer Robert Zimmerman said in an email: “Our clients are thankful for the opportunity to present their case to a jury.”
The case is Slatowski et al v Sig Sauer Inc, 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-1639.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Diane Craft)