However, the district court initially excluded crucial portions of the expert testimony, ruling that neither expert had conducted specific testing to simulate the conditions of Slatowski’s accident. This exclusion led District Judge R. Barclay Surrick to grant summary judgment in favor of Sig Sauer, effectively ending the case before trial.
Appeals Court Reversal: A Victory for Jury Determination
The Third Circuit’s reversal represents a significant shift in how courts evaluate complex products liability cases involving firearms. Judge Bibas’s opinion emphasizes the fundamental principle that juries, not judges, should determine factual disputes when adequate evidence exists.
“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.”
The appellate court distinguished between expert testimony needed to explain complex technical concepts and testimony required to establish causation. While upholding the exclusion of expert opinions about what specifically caused the discharge, the court ruled that experts could still testify about the weapon’s design defects.
The Human Cost Behind Legal Precedent
Beyond the technical legal arguments lies the personal impact on Keith Slatowski and his wife Bianca, who joined the lawsuit. The couple’s attorney, Robert Zimmerman, expressed gratitude for the opportunity to present their case: “Our clients are thankful for the opportunity to present their case to a jury.”
