In a gripping legal battle, an individual from Florida has filed a lawsuit against a prominent firearms manufacturer, alleging severe injuries caused by a defective pistol. The complaint was lodged by William John Tess in the Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit in Pinellas County, Florida, on November 17, 2025. Tess is taking legal action against Springfield Inc., an Illinois corporation known for its firearms under the Springfield Armory brand.
The case revolves around Tess’s claim that he sustained life-threatening injuries due to the unintended discharge of a Springfield Armory Model 1911-A1 pistol. According to the complaint, Tess purchased the firearm in 2017 and used it as intended until December 7, 2023, when it allegedly discharged while secured in its holster without being handled. The bullet struck Tess in the head, causing severe trauma and necessitating extensive medical treatment. Tess asserts that the pistol’s design was inherently dangerous and lacked necessary safety features like a firing-pin block or drop-safety mechanism—features commonly found in similar firearms since the early 1980s.
Tess accuses Springfield Inc., along with Springfield Guns Inc. and Springfield Armory Holdings Inc., of negligence and breach of implied warranties. He claims these entities failed to warn consumers about the firearm’s defects and did not implement adequate safety measures despite knowing about potential risks associated with their products. “Defendants deliberately declined to incorporate any comparable firing-pin block or drop-safety mechanism into the Springfield Armory Model 1911-A1 pistols,” states the complaint, highlighting what Tess sees as willful negligence.
The plaintiff seeks compensatory damages exceeding $50,000 for his injuries, which include permanent physical impairments and emotional distress. He is also pursuing pre- and post-judgment interest, attorneys’ fees, and other relief deemed appropriate by the court. This case underscores ongoing concerns about product safety standards within the firearms industry and raises questions about corporate responsibility in ensuring consumer protection.
Representing William John Tess are attorneys Shirin M. Vesely, Jade T. Wooden, Michael F. Harrigan Jr., from Trenam Law Firm based in St. Petersburg, Florida; alongside David L. Selby II and Matthew J. Ford from Bailey & Glasser LLP in Birmingham, Alabama (pending pro hac vice admission). The case is identified under Case Number: 25-006499-CI.
Source: 5006499CI_William_John_v_Springfield_Complaint_Pinellas_County_Florida.pdf
