In O’Neal v. Remington Arms Co., L.L.C., 803 F.3d 974 (8th Cir. 2015) (No. 14-2883), the Eighth Circuit addressed a summary judgment entered below for the defendant rifle manufacturer in a case brought by the wife of a man killed when his hunting rifle accidentally discharged. Before she realized that the rifle might be defective, the plaintiff had the rifle destroyed. Some time thereafter, she saw a television report discussing evidence that defendant had manufactured approximately 20,000 rifles with a defective trigger and safety mechanism. Thereafter, plaintiff sued and attempted to carry her burden of proof by having the rifle’s prior owners testify that they had not replaced the trigger and safety mechanism to show that it was original to the rifle. Plaintiff also produced an expert witness who opined, based on the nature of the fatal firing, that the trigger and safety mechanism was original to the rifle. The Eighth Circuit reversed the summary judgment entered against plaintiff and remanded the case for trial, holding that the combined testimony was sufficient to submit to a jury.
Register now for your free, tailored, daily legal newsfeed service.
Questions? Please contact firstname.lastname@example.orgRegister
Standard Set For Considering Alleged Defect In Previously Destroyed Rifle
Popular articles from this firm
If you would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email email@example.com.
Related topic hubs
McDonald Carano Wilson LLP
“I really enjoy Lexology and incorporate into my practice everyday. I find the content very timely and well written. Keep up the good work.”