Johnson v. Bass Pro Outdoor World

Summary

The court held that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act bars Johnson's product-liability claims against the firearm sellers because Lewis voluntarily pulled the trigger, causing the gun to discharge, and the resulting shooting constituted a Kansas strict-liability crime. The court rejected an interpretation requiring Lewis to intend the discharge or requiring the trigger pull alone to constitute a crime. It therefore reversed the Court of Appeals, affirmed the district court's summary judgment, and remanded the case. The court also held that interlocutory appellate jurisdiction extends to issues fairly included in the certified order, but it did not reach the evidentiary issue because the sellers no longer had a continuing interest in it.