GOWER V. SAVAGE ARMS, INC.
166 F.Supp. 2d 240 (2001)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Savage (D) moved for summary judgment in Gower's (P) suit alleging
that the rifle purchased by P was a defective product and that D was liable for compensatory
and punitive damages under a theory of successor liability.
FACTS: P was hunting with his two brothers and his brother-in-law. P left the woods and
headed toward their truck and as he emerged from the woods, he turned around for one more
visual sweep of the woods and field. P was preparing to unload his gun when the gun
discharged, shooting him in the foot. P was wearing thick gloves, and his fingers were
inside the trigger guard when the gun discharged. At the time of the discharge P had not
taken the gun off the 'safe' position. The rifle was designed so as not to fire when in the
'safe' position. The rifle was manufactured by Savage Industries. P purchased the rifle in
October, 1989 from the Quarry Sporting Goods Store, which no longer exists as a business
entity and is not a party to this lawsuit. At the time of purchase, a Quarry Sporting Goods
employee demonstrated to P how the safety mechanism on the rifle functioned. All guns
shipped out by Savage Industries in 1987 were shipped in boxes containing safety manuals. P
purchased the gun without its box and did not receive a safety manual with the gun. As
confirmed by expert inspections, the rifle was not working properly at the time of the
accident. The safety mechanism could only be placed in the 'safe' position with more than
the usually required force. In February 1988, Savage Industries filed for bankruptcy. The
owners of Savage Industries set up a company, named D. In July of 1989, Savage Industries
sold four of its eleven product lines, including the Model 99 product line, together with
associated tooling, machinery, trademarks, trade-names, patents, trade secrets, and
goodwill, to D. On November 1, 1989 Challenger International purchased the four product
lines and also took over the physical manufacturing plant previously used by Savage
Industries. D contracted with a foreign corporation, Llama, located in Spain, to manufacture
the Model 99. Llama used its own equipment, its own processes and procedures and its own
components to manufacture the Model 99s. D then attached a stock to the rifles before being
distributed. Llama stopped manufacturing the Model 99s around 1992 or 1993. In 1994, D
continued to use the remaining component parts from Llama to produce Model 99s. In or around
1995, D then began to manufacture the Model 99s itself. D claims that Savage Industries sold
and/or liquidated all of the manufacturing equipment used to produce the Model 99 Lever
Action Rifle in or around September of 1988 prior to contracting with Llama to produce the
Model 99s. D claims that they purchased entirely new equipment in 1995, prior to resuming
the manufacture of Model 99s, and that a new manufacturing process was used. Evidence showed
that the manufacturing processes and tools remained substantially the same from the 1960s to
the present. Challenger International retained ownership of D until November 1, 1995, when
Ronald Coburn purchased Savage Arms from Challenger International through a holding company,
registered as Savage Sports Corporation. D moved for summary judgment.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment