Judge rules lawsuit from Old National Bank victims can continue against gun seller
A judge ruled that a lawsuit filed by families of victims of the Old National Bank mass shooting in Louisville can continue, which would hold a gun seller, a distributor and a firearm accessory manufacturer legally responsible.
Jefferson County Judge Mitch Perry ruled Monday a federal law that grants broad immunity to gun manufacturers does not prohibit the lawsuit from proceeding in court.
Family members of victims and survivors of the Old National Bank shooting filed a lawsuit in Jefferson County Circuit Court against River City Firearms in January 2024. Two companies that sell firearms accessories were soon added as additional defendants — RSR Group Inc. and Magpul Industries Corporation.
The shooting took place inside the Old National Building in downtown Louisville on April 10, 2023, and left five people dead and eight others injured. The gunman, Connor Sturgeon, was also killed. Thomas Elliott, Jim Tutt, Josh Barrick, Deana Eckert and Juliana Farmer were fatally shot by Sturgeon.
Perry’s ruling
Federal law protects gunmakers from liability in many cases, but an exception is made if the conduct of the company violated a state law.
In an eight-paged ruling filed Monday, Perry called the shooting “one of the worst acts of mass violence the community has ever experienced.”
Perry found that in the defendants’ claims so far, they have not met the legal requirements that would prevent them from being held liable in the shooting.
The defendants requested the lawsuit be dismissed, and cited the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, saying it barred them from the allegations against them.
However, the standard for dismissal is extremely high — and one Perry said the gun manufacturer did not meet. During motions for lawsuit dismissals, a judge must hear facts about the case and view them in the light most favorable to the victims.
A large portion of the lawsuit centers around the claims toward the sale of gun accessories, which Perry ruled were not barred by the federal laws because the items are “accessories” and not “component parts” essential to the firearms function.
“Instead of recognizing the outward manifestations of mental turmoil, the Plaintiffs allege that not only did River City sell the shooter a weapon not suited for his stated purpose of self-defense, but also upsold him enhancements to make the firearm even deadlier,” Perry said in denying the motion to dismiss.
Perry also allowed claims of violation of state law, negligent entrustment (meaning the companies supplied dangerous tools to a person who was likely to cause harm) and general negligence to proceed. The lawsuit also accuses River City of negligence, wrongful death and deprivation of benefits of a parental and spousal relationship.
Tad Thomas, one of several lawyers for the plaintiffs, called Perry’s ruling a “major victory” for the victims and their families.
“That Monday morning, many families lost loved ones, and other members of our Louisville community suffered lifelong injuries,” Thomas said. “The court’s decision today puts us one step closer to holding the wrongdoers responsible for the tragedy they caused and making Louisville a safer place to live.”
What the lawsuit alleges
The lawsuit alleges River City Firearms had a responsibility to notice Sturgeon was not an experienced firearms user and should have declined to sell to him.
Instead, River City sold Sturgeon several add-ons to the assault-style firearm making it more deadly, the lawsuit claims. These include a vertical power grip, red dot sight and three large-capacity extended magazines.
Sturgeon purchased the firearms and accessories four days before the mass shooting.
Thomas told the Herald-Leader in a previous interview that one of the first red flags was Sturgeon’s odd behavior in the store when he went to purchase the firearm — averting others’ gazes and speaking softly.
A witness from the store recounted the appearance of Sturgeon’s inexperience with firearms. A store employee had to show Sturgeon how to perform basic functions with the gun, including how to load it, hold it and use certain features, the witness said.
One witness from River City told her husband after the shooting, “I bet it was that kid at the store,” according to the lawsuit.
“It was obvious to the witness that Sturgeon had never handled a gun before,” the lawsuit said. “Sturgeon also commented about the high cost of the firearm and accessories — despite purchasing one of the cheapest AR-15-style rifles on the market — further displaying his inexperience and ignorance about firearms.”
He paid $762.90, according to a store receipt.
Witnesses at the store said Sturgeon claimed he was buying the weapon for “home defense” after his friend’s home was broken into.
Thomas said a novice like Sturgeon, who expressed concern about the price of the weapon he bought, would be unlikely to seek out an AR-15-style rifle for home defense.
“Therefore, River City knew, or reasonably should have known, that, under all the circumstances, an AR-15-style rifle was not a suitable choice for home defense for this purchaser,” the lawsuit read.
In 23 seconds, Sturgeon was able to fire nearly 30 rounds inside the Old National Bank conference room. He reloaded a new magazine before exchanging fire with responding to police officers, who killed Sturgeon.
“If River City had not sold Sturgeon this extra (magazine), Sturgeon would not have been able to continue firing. Instead, bullets continued to rain down on innocents until Sturgeon was incapacitated,” the lawsuit said.
A hearing has not yet been set for the lawsuit.
