Update (October 17, 2025): Since the initial publication of this article, Sig Sauer has responded to the lawsuit, and this article has been updated to reflect that.
The anti-gun and ever litigious New Jersey Attorney General has launched a lawsuit against Sig Sauer, alleging defective design in the Sig Sauer P320, resulting in unintended discharges.
Platkin v. Sig Sauer, Inc. was filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey Chancery Division, Essex County, on October 16.
The 59-page complaint is also brought by Elizabeth M. Harris, Acting Director of the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs.
The complaint starts by describing a February 2022 event in which Raymond Tillotson, a Howell Township, New Jersey police officer, was injured while allegedly holstering his Sig Sauer Model P320 service weapon, which had an uncommanded discharge, injuring his leg.
The complaint goes on to detail three other instances in which New Jersey law enforcement officers were allegedly injured by the same weapon during uncommanded discharges. It also acknowledges possible injuries in the civilian market, but only with a single, passing statement:
Civilian Sig Sauer P320 owners in New Jersey have experienced their own unintended shootings.
New Jersey, which often employs fear as a tactic when discussing firearms, strays from the alleged material injuries in the complaint, adding statements like:
Children have experienced the panic of witnessing a gun suddenly firing at a football game…
And:
They have been traumatized by seeing a trained officer bleeding in front of them, not knowing who or what has shot him, or whether they might be shot next.
The complaint goes on to discuss the technicalities of the Sig design and its striker-fired system, elements of its marketing statements, and assertions through other court cases that Sig knew the design was faulty and prone to unintended discharges.
“This lawsuit is about Sig Sauer prioritizing profit over consumer safety,” said Elizabeth M. Harris, Acting Director of the Division of Consumer Affairs. “Any company doing business in New Jersey will be held accountable for making false claims about the products they sell, especially when those misrepresentations put our residents in grave danger of serious bodily injury or death.”
However, New Jersey’s track record in targeting firearms manufacturers is blemished, often seen as opportunistic and lacking credibility. New Jersey previously filed a lawsuit against Glock Inc. and Glock Ges.m.b.H, its Austrian parent company, in the New Jersey Federal District Court on Nov. 16, 2022, under New Jersey’s nuisance law (N.J. Stat. § 2C:58-35). After promising not to bring enforcement actions against the company, the state reversed course, and subsequently, a district court judge allowed NSSF to reopen their suit against the state, which is ongoing and we have reported on here.
On October 17, Sig posted a statement to X in response to the lawsuit stating:
New Jersey Attorney General Platkin (D) filed a complaint against SIG SAUER, making numerous false and unsubstantiated claims about the P320. This false information requires immediate clarification and remedy.
The statement then goes on to address specific allegations in the lawsuit
