Philadelphia, PA – A significant legal victory has emerged from Philadelphia as a federal court awarded $11 million in damages to U.S. Army veteran George Abrahams, who suffered injuries from an accidental discharge of his holstered Sig Sauer P320 pistol. The jury concluded that the firearm was defectively designed, marking a key decision against the renowned gun manufacturer.
The verdict encompasses $10 million in punitive damages and $1 million in compensatory damages after a three-week trial. This case is noted as the first involving the P320 model in Pennsylvania, bringing to light issues concerning the firearm’s safety and design.
George Abrahams is among the increasing number of plaintiffs succeeding in their lawsuits against Sig Sauer. He suffered a severe injury in June 2020 when his P320 pistol discharged without any manual trigger pull as he was descending the stairs in his home. The bullet penetrated his right leg, causing permanent damage.
Representation for Abrahams was led by Robert W. Zimmerman of Saltz Mongeluzzi Bendesky PC, who asserted that the gun’s risks were known to Sig Sauer prior to these incidents. The P320, Zimmerman noted, lacked sufficient safety mechanisms that could have prevented such accidents. Notably, the version sold to the military included an external safety feature, a detail omitted in the bulk of the civilian and police market models.
The legal team underscored the manufacturer’s decision to eliminate a trigger safety which was common within the industry, suggesting a disregard for consumer safety. This lawsuit and the magnitude of the jury’s award underscore the broader concerns and potential hazards associated with this model.
During the trial, Zimmerman emphasized his client’s bravery in filing the suit, paralleling it to his military service. He expressed hope that the verdict would send a forceful message to Sig Sauer about the serious consequences of neglecting customer safety.
Supporting Zimmerman was co-counsel Ryan Hurd, who reiterated the peril the P320 poses not only to owners but also to those around them. Saltz Mongeluzzi Bendesky represents over 100 other individuals who have reported similar incidents with the P320, aiming to hold Sig Sauer accountable and pressure the company to adopt safer design practices akin to other manufacturers.
This case has attracted attention in the midst of ongoing scrutiny regarding the P320, which previously surfaced in investigative reports by major media outlets last year. As part of larger litigation related to this model, the law firm continues its efforts to prevent future injuries through rigorous legal battles and public awareness.
For further information on this ongoing litigation and the troubled history of the P320 model, interested parties can visit www.SMB_SigSauerCases.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and includes factual representations that may not be accurate. To request removal, retraction, or corrections, please contact contact@publiclawlibrary.org.