Lyons v. Saeilo, Inc.

1

DONALD LYONS and JILLIAN LYONS, Plaintiffs, v. SAEILO, INC., d/b/a KAHR ARMS, Defendant.

No. 5:21-cv-00043-LCB

United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Northeastern Division

March 31, 2023

OPINION & ORDER

LILES C. BURKE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiffs Donald and Jillian Lyons bring this product liability action against Defendant Saeilo, Inc., which does business as Kahr Arms. Plaintiffs allege that Mr. Lyons's 9mm Kahr CW9 semi-automatic pistol discharged when it fell from his holster and hit their garage floor, severely injuring him. Plaintiffs bring claims for negligence or wantonness violation of the Alabama Extended Manufacturers' Liability Doctrine (“the AEMLD”), breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and loss of consortium. (Doc. 1 at 8-14.)

Before the Court are two motions: Kahr's motion to exclude the expert testimony of Plaintiffs' liability expert, Charles Powell, and Kahr's motion for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. (Docs. 51 and 53.) For the reasons given below, the Court finds that part of Mr Powell's testimony is admissible under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), but even with that testimony, Plaintiffs cannot preclude a finding of summary judgment in favor of Kahr. Thus, Kahr's motion to exclude is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, and Kahr's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs base their claims for relief-and Kahr, its motions-on the following facts.

A. The Mechanics of Kahr's CW9 Semi-Automatic Pistol

Kahr designs, manufactures, markets, and sells firearms. (Doc. 1 at 4.) One of Kahr's firearms is the 9mm CW9 semi-automatic pistol. (Doc. 1 at 4.) The CW9 pistol is striker-fired. (Doc. 59 at 7.) In a striker-fired pistol, a spring-loaded rod, called a striker, replaces the hammer and firing pin that operate in a traditional pistol. (Doc. 59 at 7.) To load the CW9 pistol, a magazine with at least one round (i.e., a bullet) must be inserted into the pistol's magazine well. (Doc. 54 at 8.) Then the slide (i.e., the top part of the pistol that moves) must be manually pulled back. (Doc. 54 at 8.) As the slide gets released forward, it loads a round in the chamber. (Doc. 54 at 8.) At that point, the pistol is cocked, or ready to fire. When the trigger is pulled and the pistol discharges or fires, the slide springs rearward and then forward, chambering another round-this action is what makes the pistol semiautomatic. (Doc. 58-5 at 5.)

As part of Kahr's design for the CW9 pistol, the trigger connects to a trigger bar. (Doc. 58-5 at 5.) At the other end of the trigger bar is a disconnector tab. (Doc. 58-5 at 5.) Unlike the trigger, both the trigger bar and the disconnector tab are internal components. (Doc. 58-5 at 5.) The disconnector tab connects to the cocking cam system,^[1] and it also interacts with the slide. (Doc. 58-5 at 5.) As the slide moves rearward or forward,^[2] it pushes the disconnector tab downward, so the trigger bar gets disconnected from the cocking cam system. (Doc. 58-5 at 5.) Said differently, when the slide is out of battery, the pistol cannot discharge. (Doc. 58-5 at 5.) When the slide is in battery, or in its fully forward position, the trigger bar is connected to the cocking cam system. (Doc. 58-5 at 5.) This disconnector tab design is common in striker-fired pistols. (Doc. 58-5 at 5.)

When a striker-fired pistol is cocked, the striker is pulled back against spring pressure and held by a fire control mechanism component. (Doc. 59 at 7.) The CW9 pistol uses a cocking cam system to control and release the striker. (Doc. 51 at 2 and Doc. 58-5 at 4.) One cam, often referred to as the sear, is the component that holds the striker when the pistol is cocked. (Doc. 58-5 at 4.) Stated previously, the disconnector tab on the trigger bar connects the trigger to the cocking cam system. (Doc. 51 at 2.) As the trigger gets pulled rearward, the trigger bar shifts forward, and the cocking cam system rotates, causing the sear to pull the striker back even further. (Doc. 60 at 2.) When the system fully rotates, the sear releases the striker, which springs forward and hits the bullet cartridge's primer, projecting the cartridge out of the pistol. (Doc. 60 at 2.)

One of the internal safety mechanisms in the CW9 pistol is the striker block. (Doc. 51 at 2.) The striker block “keeps the firing pin [which is part of the striker] from contacting the primer of the cartridge.” (Doc. 51 at 2.) During a trigger pull, the second cam in the cocking cam system pushes the striker block out of the way so that when the striker gets released by the sear, the firing pin can hit the primer. (Doc. 51 at 2 and Doc. 58-5 at 4.)

Similar to other striker-fired semi-automatic pistols, such as the Glock G17, the CW9 pistol does not have an external manual safety mechanism, such as a conventional safety (i.e., an on/off switch). (Doc. 58-5 at 4.) It also does not have a trigger safety, which is a small tab on the trigger that must be fully decompressed or “pushed in” before the trigger can be pulled. (Doc. 58-5 at 3.) A trigger safety is found on some semi-automatic pistols but not all. (Doc. 51 at 4.)

B. The Incident on July 2, 2019

On January 12, 2010, Kahr sold a CW9 semi-automatic pistol, serial number EE4752, (“the Subject Pistol”) to Larry's Pistol and Pawn Shop. (Doc. 54 at 5.)^[3]An individual purchased the Subject Pistol later that year. (Doc. 54 at 5.) Roughly ten years later, Plaintiffs purchased the Subject Pistol at an auction. (Doc. 54 at 5.) The maintenance history and the conditions of the Subject Pistol from late 2010 to the time of Plaintiffs' purchase are unknown. (Doc. 54 at 5.)

After purchasing the Subject Pistol, Mr. Lyons disassembled it, cleaned it, and completed a functions check. (Doc. 54 at 7.) Mr. Lyons also bought a leather holster for the Subject Pistol, which did not have a retention strap. (Doc. 54 at 8.) He would carry the Subject Pistol in the holster around his property with one round in the chamber and a full magazine inserted in the magazine well. (Doc. 54 at 8.)

Before the incident at issue, Mr. Lyons used the Subject Pistol on two separate occasions: once at a range where he shot multiple rounds, and the week before the incident where he discharged it several times on his property, both at a target and at rats. (Doc. 54 at 7.) Mr. Lyons testified in his deposition that on both occasions, the Subject Pistol functioned properly. (Doc. 54 at 7.)

On July 2, 2019, Mr. Lyons returned home from work and began mowing the lawn with the holster and the Subject Pistol affixed to the belt on the Scottish kilt he was wearing. (Doc. 54 at 9.) Two hours later, Mrs. Lyons told him there was a snake trying to enter the house through the garage, so he went and tried to catch the snake by the tail. (Doc. 54 at 9.) As Mr. Lyons leaned down to pick up the snake, the Subject Pistol fell out of the holster, struck the concrete floor, and discharged. (Doc. 1 at 7.) There is no evidence that Mr. Lyons bumped into anything when he leaned down. (Doc. 53 at 10.) A bullet struck Mr. Lyons in the “upper right leg, traveled through his abdomen, passed through his colon, nicked his bladder, struck his iliac vein, and penetrated his left pelvic bone” before stopping near the skin of his left buttocks. (Doc. 1 at 7.) Mr. Lyons's injuries resulted in multiple surgeries and extensive medical treatment and rehabilitation. (Doc. 1 at 7.)

C. Experts' Testing and Examination of the Subject Pistol

On January 12, 2021, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint against Kahr in this Court. (Doc. 1.) During discovery, on October 28, 2020, Plaintiffs' expert, Charles Powell, and Kahr's expert, Derek Watkins, examined the Subject Pistol together. (Doc. 54 at 10.) That day was the only time the Subject Pistol was examined or tested by either expert. (Doc. 51-10 at 13.)

During their inspection, Mr. Powell and Mr. Watkins noticed some scratches on the slide's rear, damage to the front sight, and at least some damage to the disconnector tab. (Doc. 51-7 at 7-8 and Doc. 58-5 at 18-24.) Mr. Powell later claimed he saw corresponding microscopic scratches on the slide's inner surface, which Mr. Watkins did not see. (Doc. 51-7 at 7-8 and Doc. 51-10 at 11-12.) Both Mr. Powell and Mr. Watkins tested the Subject Pistol's functionality, which included testing specific components and disassembling and reassembling the firearm, and they found that everything functioned properly. (Doc. 54 at 10.)

In order to complete his analysis, Mr. Powell purchased his own Kahr CW9 pistol (“the Exemplar”) to run some tests. (Doc. 51-10 at 12.) Mr. Powell is a registered engineer who for the past forty years has “engaged in the business of engineering failure analysis of products and structures and accident investigation.” (Doc. 58-5 at 2.) In November 2021, Mr. Powell completed ten drop tests with the Exemplar onto concrete using a drop box. (Doc. 51-10 at 12, 40.) The first drop test was conducted from 48 inches, and the next nine were conducted from 60 inches. (Doc. 54 at 12.) During those ten tests, the Exemplar never discharged on impact with the concrete. (Doc. 54 at 11-12.)

That same month, Mr. Powell began experimenting with the Exemplar by placing small pieces of brass or polymer in the cavity where the disconnector tab sits, and he would manipulate the pieces until they held the tab and trigger bar forward causing a partial trigger pull. (Doc. 54 at 12-13.) He analyzed the Exemplar in that condition using his TriggerScan system. (Doc. 51-10 at 20.) Shortly thereafter, Mr. Powell completed his expert report for this lawsuit where he wrote that the CW9 pistol is defectively designed and should have a trigger safety. (Doc. 58-5 at 1, 4-5...