Sig Sauer Can’t DQ Gun Expert’s Experiment In Defect Suit

Sig Sauer failed to convince a Massachusetts federal judge to disqualify an experiment by the plaintiff’s gun expert.

Law360 (June 26, 2024) — Gunmaker Sig Sauer Inc. can’t dodge a police officer’s lawsuit claiming its P320 pistol spontaneously discharged and injured her without the trigger being touched, after the company failed to convince a Massachusetts federal judge to disqualify an experiment by the plaintiff’s gun expert comparing its gun to an analogous Glock model.

In similar lawsuits across the country over the same pistol, the firearms manufacturer has targeted plaintiffs’ expert witness, James Tertin, a gunsmith, for disqualification. While Sig Sauer has succeeded many times, U.S. District Judge Patti B. Saris said there is no question in her mind that Tertin is a “qualified” expert and that his opinion is based on good data.

Excluding Tertin and other plaintiffs’ expert testimony has been Sig Sauer’s key to successfully dismissing federal lawsuits in Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Oklahoma.

In one case where the German arms company failed to fully disqualify experts’ testimony, the case went to trial, and a Georgia federal jury hit Sig Sauer with a $2.3 million verdict.

Similar to those lawsuits, the present lawsuit claims the Sig Sauer P320 fired without the trigger being touched. The Massachusetts plaintiff, Ashley Catatao, an officer with the Somerville Police Department, claims she was walking to her patrol car when the gun discharged, striking her in her upper right thigh. According to her complaint, the incident was filmed on the department’s surveillance cameras.

Tertin has claimed in his testimony that the Sig Sauer P320 should have added a “tabbed trigger” to the gun, making it “highly improbable” for the pistol to go off unintentionally, according to the court record. This mechanism, which often looks like a second trigger, must be pressed in order for the gun to work.

Additionally, Tertin conducted experiments on the P320 and a rival handgun, the Glock 19, the court record said. He created an apparatus with a humanlike arm with a simulated finger. The tests had the rubber finger touch the “edge of the trigger[s]” at different angles, the order said. He concluded that the P320, which does not have a trigger safety, would fire if its trigger were touched at certain angles, but the Glock, which has a tabbed trigger, would not fire, according to the court record.

While his expert report did not include the results of his experiment, Tertin did talk about it during a deposition, the court record said.

Sig Sauer urged the court to exclude his report and all references to this experiment, leaning on the fact that he only disclosed the experiment during a deposition. But the judge disagreed.

“Sig Sauer questioned Tertin regarding the experiments at his deposition and does not argue it was prejudiced in any way,” she said. “Thus, the court does not exclude Tertin’s opinion for insufficient bases in facts or data. The court also rejects Sig Sauer’s argument that Tertin’s testimony is irrelevant.”

Catatao is represented by Robert W. Zimmerman, Ryan D. Hurd and Samuel A. Haaz of Saltz Mongeluzzi Bendesky and Stephen Semenza of the Law Offices of Steven Semenza.

Sig Sauer is represented by Jonathan Woy of Littleton Park Joyce Ughetta & Kelly LLP.

The case is Catatao v. Sig Sauer Inc., case number 1:22-cv-10620, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.