P320 Misfire Lawsuit Goes to Jury

A federal jury in Maine is now deciding whether Sig Sauer's P320 is a defective firearm or whether a jacket zipper and inadequate training are what put a deputy in the hospital.

Driving the news: Trial opened Monday in Cole v. Sig Sauer in U.S. District Court in Bangor. Deputy David Cole of the Somerset County Sheriff's Office was shot in the right leg on May 4, 2022, when his P320 discharged while holstered. He was walking to his truck. He never touched the trigger.

State of play: Cole's injuries are permanent. He tore through his right thigh, calf, and ankle — a bullet path that left him unable to run reliably in the field.

"Dave will tell you that he prays, literally prays, that his work limitations won't end in a disaster for himself or for someone he needs to protect." — Robert Zimmerman, Cole's attorney

The legal question: Both sides agree the trigger was pulled. The fight is over what pulled it.

• Cole's argument: The P320's design allows unintended discharges. Sig knew about the problem for at least five years before this shooting. The gun fired because of design choices, not user error.
• Sig Sauer's argument: A zipper from Cole's jacket got between the trigger and the holster. The holster — not made by Sig — didn't adequately protect the trigger. The gun functioned exactly as designed.

The intrigue: Sig is pointing fingers in every direction at once — the holster manufacturer, the sheriff's department (four hours of training, no manual safety policy, chamber-loaded mandate), and Cole himself for letting a jacket zipper near the trigger guard. That's a lot of defendants who aren't in the room.

Sig's own numbers complicate that defense. Zimmerman noted that roughly 93% of P320s sold cannot accept the manual thumb safety Sig offers as an option. The Somerset County Sheriff's Office had a department policy against manual safeties anyway — but the broader point stands: the safety isn't a realistic solution for most P320 owners.

Reality check: The P320 has a documented history of unintended discharge complaints going back years, primarily tied to drop-fire issues the military addressed with a voluntary upgrade in 2017. Whether that history is admissible or relevant here will likely be one of the trial's contested threads. The company's consistent position — that the gun cannot fire without a trigger pull — hasn't changed.

What to watch: This trial runs two weeks. The outcome could influence how law enforcement agencies evaluate the P320 for duty carry, and whether the holster-and-training defense holds up under jury scrutiny. A substantial damages award would be significant ammunition for the broader wave of P320 litigation still working through the courts.