⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Fourth Circuit hears Jack Williams's challenge to the dismissal of his product-liability lawsuit against Sig Sauer. His P three-twenty discharged while he sat on a motorcycle with the holstered pistol in his back pocket. He says a design defect allowed it to fire without a full trigger pull; Sig Sauer disputes that explanation. The district court excluded his two proposed experts and granted summary judgment, ending the case without a trial. The dispute is whether their testing and experience reliably connected an alleged defect to this particular discharge. Federal Evidence Rule seven-oh-two makes the judge a gatekeeper for expert testimony. The party offering an expert must show, more likely than not, that the testimony meets the rule's requirements, including sufficient facts, reliable methods and reliable application to the case. The twenty twenty-three amendment made that burden express; admissibility means whether the jury may hear the opinion, while weight concerns how persuasive an admitted opinion is. Abuse-of-discretion review gives the trial judge leeway on that evidence ruling, rather than simply asking what the appeals court would have done. Lawson Hester will argue for Williams; Eric Lasker will defend Sig Sauer's judgment. Later, the panel turns to a separate firearms-industry liability law and a dispute over concealed carrying.

Jack Williams v. Sig Sauer, Inc. (No. 25-2196) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, argued October 14, 2026.