Appeals court revives suit over Sig Sauer pistol that fired unexpectedly

A federal appeals court revived claims that Sig Sauer must answer for a pistol that allegedly discharged without a trigger pull, giving a jury the chance to weigh whether a design choice, not user error, caused a police injury and whether a different safety could have prevented it.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan ruled 2-1 on May 28 that Michael Colwell, a Troy Police Department detective, can press his product-liability case against the gunmaker. Colwell says he was hurt in June 2021 when his department-issued Sig Sauer P320 fired while it was holstered and he never touched the trigger. He and his wife, Julia Colwell, first sued in federal court in Albany in November 2021.

The lawsuit includes claims for strict products liability, negligence, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, breach of express warranty, and negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Gerard Lynch said a reasonable jury could conclude the shooting would not have happened if the pistol had been equipped with a tabbed trigger, an external safety feature. That reasoning pushed the case past an early legal hurdle and kept alive a dispute that reaches well beyond one detective’s injury.

The ruling matters for police departments, firearms buyers and gun makers because it tests where responsibility lies when a weapon is said to fire unexpectedly. If Colwell prevails, agencies that buy or issue handguns could face harder questions about safety features, warnings and procurement standards. Gun owners could also see renewed scrutiny of how manufacturers describe internal safeties and what evidence is required to prove a pistol cannot fire unless the trigger is deliberately pulled.

Sig Sauer has maintained that the P320 cannot fire without a trigger pull and says that conclusion has been repeatedly verified by the company, handgun experts and independent labs. The company also points to the pistol’s internal safeties and to the civilian P320 platform as the basis for the U.S. military’s M17 and M18 handguns, which Sig Sauer says passed strict military drop-testing and safety protocols.

The case arrives amid broader litigation over the P320. A Philadelphia jury awarded $11 million in a discharge case in November 2024, and a Georgia jury awarded $2.35 million in another in June 2024. Those verdicts, along with the revived Colwell suit, deepen the legal pressure on a pistol that has become a test case for how courts, juries and public agencies assess firearm design, safety claims and manufacturer accountability.