Newington, NH — A federal judge has recently affirmed a pivotal jury decision awarding $2.35 million in damages to a Georgia man who claimed his leg was severely injured by a Sig Sauer P320 pistol firing without him pulling the trigger. This ruling is a significant development in a series of lawsuits that accuse the New Hampshire-based firearms manufacturer of distributing pistols prone to accidental discharges.
In a lawsuit spotlighting Sig Sauer’s liability, Robert Lang’s case gained attention when a jury in Georgia ruled in his favor last June. Lang testified that he was shot in the thigh in 2018 as he was holstering the firearm, suggesting a potential defect in the gun’s design. This incident marked the first occasion Sig Sauer was held accountable in court for an unintentional discharge involving its P320 model.
The company appealed the 2021 verdict, contesting the admissibility of certain evidence presented during the trial, which lasted two weeks. Their request for a retrial was recently denied by the judge, who also dismissed Sig Sauer’s plea to mitigate the awarded damages for pain and suffering from $2.35 million to $500,000.
Attorneys representing Lang have hailed the judge’s decision as a victory for their client. “The jury analyzed and digested the evidence thoroughly,” they announced. Attorney Robert Zimmerman further criticized Sig Sauer for not modifying the design of the P320 to prevent further mishaps among law enforcement personnel and civilian users.
Central to the case against the P320 is its lack of an external safety feature, such as a tabbed trigger, which could mitigate risks of unintended firing. Court documents show that while both parties concur that the gun discharged due to trigger activation, they disagree on what fundamentally caused the trigger to engage.
Despite not immediately responding to inquiries for comment regarding the latest judicial ruling, Sig Sauer’s situation remains precarious as they decide on the next steps, possibly including further appeals.
The P320’s safety has been under scrutiny since its launch, with over 2.5 million units sold across the United States. Similar incidents of unexpected discharges led to another jury in Philadelphia awarding $11 million to a victim in November last year.
Concerns raised about the P320 initially emerged in 2017 when a prominent online firearms retailer pointed out the model’s susceptibility to fire upon being dropped at specific angles. Sig Sauer responded with a voluntary modification program to enhance the trigger and striker mechanisms, affirming the gun’s safety in both its original and modified designs.
The U.S. military, which adopted a specialized version of the P320 known as the M17 and M18—complete with an external safety—for its armed services in a contract worth over $500 million the same year, has experienced similar safety concerns. Despite additional safety measures, reports of unintended discharges have surfaced, although the military maintains the weapon is secure for soldier use.
As Sig Sauer faces ongoing litigation and public scrutiny, the controversy surrounding the P320 continues to challenge the prominent gunmaker’s reputation.
Disclaimer: This article was automatically generated by Open AI. The people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate, and any required corrections or retractions can be requested by email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.