# Woman sues Hornady for faulty case



## specialpatrolgroup (Jan 16, 2009)

If a case has a defect, should the chamber blow up like this, I would think that the pressure would still release through the barrell, unless the bullet was lodged somewhere?

GRAND FORKS - A Thompson, N.D., woman who had a rifle shell explode in her face on her first hunting trip is suing the company that made the ammunition, claiming that a defect in the design or production of the shell caused her injuries.

Sheri Sponsler, 46, was deer hunting near Edmore, N.D., on Nov. 11, 2007. When she shot at a doe, the brass casing holding the powder failed and exploded, blowing out the bottom of the gun's chamber and sending shrapnel into her face, eye and hand, according to a court complaint filed by Sponsler's attorney.

"The force of the explosion threw Sheri's head back, causing severe whiplash injury. Sheri immediately noticed that her ears were ringing immensely," the complaint reads.

The ammunition company, Hornady Manufacturing Co., based in Grand Island, Neb., denies any wrongdoing and has requested the case be dismissed. Hornady, founded in 1949, sells bullets in the U.S and around the world.

Sponsler's complaint was filed in federal court in November 2009. Both sides are scheduled to meet at a Feb. 25 hearing in Fargo.

The complaint says Sponsler's boyfriend, who, at the time of the incident, had taught hunter safety for about eight years, bought the ammo, a box of Hornady 60 shells, at Scheels sporting goods store in Grand Forks. The shells were for Sponsler to use in a Remington 220 Swift hunting rifle that her boyfriend had borrowed from an acquaintance because it was smaller and would have less recoil, the complaint states.

Sponsler and her boyfriend shot twice at a target using the shells Nov. 10, 2007, and Sponsler took two shots Nov. 11, 2007, before the gun backfired; on all four shots, they noticed no problems, according to the complaint.

The complaint says Sponsler suffered and continues to suffer health problems, including ringing in her ears, sensitivity to sound, headaches, a sensation of movement inside her head, scars on her hand and face, symptoms of nerve damage and severe pain in her head and neck. Her eye took more than a month to heal and required several procedures to remove the shrapnel, the complaint states. She is seeking more than $75,000 in compensation for pain and emotional distress, medical expenses, lost wages and legal fees.

The complaint asserts that "weak and/or bad brass was used in the design and/or manufacture of the shell casing of the ammunition," adding that Hornady was negligent in not making "a reasonable inspection or test to discover defects."

Hornady's attorneys say Sponsler's injuries were the result of simply an accident, the negligence of a party other than the company or misuse of the ammunition. Sponsler "knew and appreciated the risk inherent in her activities and voluntarily assumed the risk of injury from those activities," the company's response says


----------



## Hunter_58346 (May 22, 2003)

Nothing regarding the gun????


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

Hunter_58346 said:


> Nothing regarding the gun????


Exactly. Sounds like the whole bottom of the chamber let loose by the writer.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

Just another example of why you should always kill your deer with your first shot! 

We've all seen what happens when a case fails in a rifle, and I've never heard of it hurting the gun. I'm sure there's more to the story yet to be uncovered.

And why the 2 year wait? Says her eye was healed in a month.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

that is what I was thinking. Plus I can't see how only one cartridge had bad brass or any other defect. It would seem that there would be others in the box or lot that would have had failures also. It seems like an obstruction in the barrel or something caused that round to fail. I can't picture the whole bottom of a 220 swift blowing over bad brass, there just doesn't seem to be enough pressure there, especially if the barrel was open.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

There is alot more to the story, one of her relatives in on here, he might shed some light.


----------



## Sponsy12 (Nov 22, 2004)

The rifle was a remington 700 .220 swift, metal fragments were stuck in her eye, and yes that healed right away. It is the whiplash and the head trama that still to this day have not healed and she continues to go to rochester for treatments. 
Sheri was not even aware that the article was written until she read it herself.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

> Sheri Sponsler, 46, was deer hunting near Edmore, N.D., on Nov. 11, 2007. When she shot at a doe, the brass casing holding the powder failed and exploded, blowing out the bottom of the gun's chamber and sending shrapnel into her face, eye and hand, according to a court complaint filed by Sponsler's attorney





> Sponsler's complaint was filed in federal court in November 2009. Both sides are scheduled to meet at a Feb. 25 hearing in Fargo





> and Sponsler took two shots Nov. 11, 2007, before the gun backfired; on all four shots, they noticed no problems, according to the complaint.


Looks like many errors in the report. I suppose it's possible the first shots on the day of the hunt were at targets, just didn't think that would be likely.

And as to my attempt at humor, I meant no disrespect. But in all honesty I'm still not buying a case issue since you and I both know if there was a way to hold the powder in the chamber WITHOUT A CASE it would not hurt the rifle one bit if you could make it go off. Pressure seeks the path of least resistance, and that should have been out the barrel unless something was blocking it.

I feel badly for the injured lady, but I desperately need to believe there is no attempt to misplace fault here.

I guess we wait to see what unfolds on the 25th. The brass could have been "weak" because Hornady put a double charge of powder in that case :wink: , and that could certainly show a case's weakness.

Be thankful the bolt missed her head when it blew out the back.

Please keep us informed


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

There still seems to be something missing here. Simply having a weak case should not have caused such a catastrophic failure. I've seen pictures of some pretty nasty cases what blew in the gun yet didn't cause that type of damage. Case head separations (weak case) are something that every reloader eventually deals with yet you hear few reports of such damage. An overcharge seems far more likely. They are very rare in commercial ammo but they can happen. A blocked barrel does not seem likely either as there would be some evidence of that. There is one other possiblility to be considered also. That the bolt was not completely closed. That could cause a headspace issue that could rupture the case and make it easier for the bolt to dislodge. Not trying to blame the shooter but sometimes in the excitement stuff like that can happen.


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

Well, I hope she gets better.

Not knowing all the facts, it's hard to say what went wrong. I have seen major case failures and many other things like it, including a 270 win fired in a 270 weatherby which removed the whole rear of the case and blew debris down through the bolt and out the vent wholes in the bottom of the bolt, and never heard of something like this.

Sounds like a overload or major gun failure, but, hopefully the facts will come out.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

What has to be determined is why the case failed. Saying the gun blew up because the case failed is like saying a woman is pregnant because she had a baby, but that's how lawyers operate. :roll: A case can't "blow up" unless the gun allows it room to do so, and something caused EXTREME pressure in the breech area of the rifle for it to come apart like it apparently did.

I also doubt it was a barrel obstruction, unless it was near the throat, but as the bearfan mentioned any attempt to figure this out is merely a guess due to the very limited amount of information available.

As far as premature firing pin strike, the bolt of a 700 has to be _almost_ completely closed to allow the firing pin to touch the primer, and at that point any headspace change would be miniscule, and I believe virtually non-existent. The bolt lugs are securely bedded by that point so the bolt would be adequately contained, and if there was a change in headspace, ever so slightly, it would be to the good, and in theory should actually _decrease_ chamber pressure simply due to the slight increase in combustion area. Case stretch would increase some but I believe chamber presure would most likely decrease. We could probably spend hours researching and debating that, but I believe it's all moot anyway due to the "cock on open" design of the 700's bolt.

The more I think about this the more I want to hear what really happened.

I'm going to risk sounding stupid (something I've never been bashful of  ) and put this out there for discussion and thought. Does anyone here have a working knowledge of how ammunition is mass produced? I don't recall ever seeing how it's done, but here's my question. Albeit EXTREMELY unlikely, would it be even remotely possible to put 2 bullets in the same case? Think about it. I'm wondering if the "second" bullet could have pushed the "first" bullet into the case as the second was seated to the proper depth, leaving a loaded round that appeared normal. Since very few factory loads use a powder and load that results in a completely full case I'm guessing there could be room to force a bullet inside. Then when fired, not only have you doubled the bullet weight, which could be disastrous alone with no other complications, the first bullet would have very little help to align it with the centerline of the bore as the chamber pressure tried to force it out the barrel.

It seems to me something had to block the chamber and/or barrel at the breech to create that kind of catastrophic pressure. Strange things can happen when things are mass produced. I remember when I was 16 years old and working at our local dairy we got a 8 pack of soda in glass bottles (name brand not mentioned  ) that had a mouse inside one of the bottles, and we probably wouldn't have noticed it had it not been for the the fact the color of the soda was changed drastically, so I'm just wondering aloud if some type of foreign object fell inside the case.

We'll probably never know.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

The history of this gun would also be interesting to know. Is the owner a handloader who pushes it to the max? If so had the gun been pushed to the max before this gal even borrowed it?

FWIW guns are proofed at pressures far beyond those determined to be max by the ammunition manufacturers. This would be considered a catastrophic failure, beyond the scope of a case failing in even a maximum load. I still think something is missing.

And don't you love this lawyerspeak.


> The complaint asserts that "weak and/or bad brass was used in the design and/or manufacture of the shell casing of the ammunition," adding that Hornady was negligent in not making "a reasonable inspection or test to discover defects."


Hornady produces some of the higher quality brass available. I'm sure even Hornady quality control spot checks and finds an occasional cull but how do you test every case for integrity?

I feel for this woman but trying to prove negligence is going to be an uphill battle. The attorney is gonna need more than one bad case to prove it.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

Definitely lots of missing info, and love your notice of "lawyerspeak", shooter.

With all due respect, is there a limit to the degree of shameless some lawyers will stoop to to further their case?

Would anyone here say something like "if it doesn't fit, you must acquit" outloud...with people in the room?


----------



## scorpiont52 (Dec 11, 2011)

Csquared said:


> What has to be determined is why the case failed. Saying the gun blew up because the case failed is like saying a woman is pregnant because she had a baby, but that's how lawyers operate. :roll: A case can't "blow up" unless the gun allows it room to do so, and something caused EXTREME pressure in the breech area of the rifle for it to come apart like it apparently did.
> 
> I also doubt it was a barrel obstruction, unless it was near the throat, but as the bearfan mentioned any attempt to figure this out is merely a guess due to the very limited amount of information available.
> 
> ...


well for one thing, with as much powder there is in a case i think it would be impossible to dubble charge it and also get 2 bullets jamed into a case that fully loaded with powder,,also i belive even if case was defective it might of split, but not blow gun appart, i am not saying these people are lying, its just making a very intresting subject


----------



## Goose Huntin' Machine (May 8, 2005)

Hornady will pay the $75,000 and move on.

It's so hard to "overload" that I highly doubt that is the case. Hell, people load "compressed loads" all the time. For those that do not know it is when the bullet is seated into the powder. Factory loads are never pushed to this limit. Even with extreme heat factory loads should not be at or near catastrophic failures. However, hand loads are mass produced and errors CAN happen by the machines. But, the chances of one case being faulty, it is doubtful. If a machine fell out of calibration, I would suspect numerous rounds in the same lot (not just one bullet) to have similar problems.

I did not see any pictures, but my theory is this...

Hand loaded rounds (not factory) and the hand Loader put pistol powder or shot gun powder into the load on accident.

Then again, if it was not "just a freak accident," I would think that they would be seeking a whole hell of a lot more rather than "just" $75,000.

Jeff Given


----------



## duckp (Mar 13, 2008)

Hope the lady and/or her lawyer has a lot of $$.It will be a battle of the 'experts' and there's plenty of expensive whores out there each side can hire-for $$$.


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

It is interesting to see what happens. I would like to know more. It happens from time to time a factory will put the wrong ammo in some rounds and they will blow up a rifle.

Chuck Norris is not Irish. His hair is soaked in the blood of his victims.


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Wow, this is an old one. Any one know if the lawyers screwed Hornady out of any money?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Savage260 said:


> Wow, this is an old one. Any one know if the lawyers screwed Hornady out of any money?


I have seen one accident just like that. The shooter was able to get a 270 Winchester cartridge into his 25-06 rifle. Big boom. They had me look at the gun and what was left of the brass. The head still showed Win in large letters. Indicating it was in reference to the cartridge and not the company making the brass.


----------



## bowtek (Nov 11, 2012)

Here's a couple pictures taken by the firearms consultant and the analysis of the Hornady brand 220 Swift cartridge casing that caused the explosion while deer hunting. There was evidence that there was inconsistent loading of the cartridges, and a greater possibility that the cartridge that exploded contained too much gun powder or the wrong kind of gun powder or the wrong bullet.

GIven the lack of damage to the rifle's barrel, the signs of extreme pressure on the cartridge case, while at the same time, no casing separation in the exploded cartridge's mid-section, the firearm was eliminated as a cause of the explosion. Given the lack of scratch marks on the inside of the neck of the exploded cartridge, it was concluded that the round that exploded had not been reloaded. Excessive extraction marks and the sharper primer edges of the cartridge further leads to conclude that the ammunition was the source of the explosion.

The primer was blown completely out of the cartridge casing. Metal from the back end of the cartridge had clearly "flowed" under great pressure into parts of the bolt where it was not intended to go. When the shot was fired, the pressure within the chamber rose to excess very quickly. This extreme pressure expanded the base of the cartridge into areas of the rifle's bolt face and pancaked the primer out of the primer pocket. Gas then escaped behind the cartridge. It was these escaping gases, mixed with pieces of the cartridge case, that caused the injuries.


----------

