ST. LOUIS — A couple appealed the dismissal of their negligence lawsuit against Academy Sports + Outdoors and an employee after a Jackson County court ruled the case was barred under the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
Jody Hendrick and Jessica Hendrick claimed Academy Sports and employee Christopher Gaither failed to implement security measures that could have prevented a firearm and ammunition from being stolen at knifepoint and later used in a shooting that injured Jody Hendrick, according to an opinion filed Oct. 29 in the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District.
On Jan. 2, 2020, an individual entered an Academy Sports store in Liberty, Mo., asked Gaither to examine a handgun, and later pulled a knife to steal the gun and ammunition after failing a background check.
The individual then used the stolen items to shoot Jody Hendrick multiple times at a nearby dealership.
Jody Hendrick alleged negligence on Academy’s part for not securing the firearm during the background check and for leaving ammunition accessible.
He further argued that Academy did not adequately train staff on handling firearms and ammunition securely.
The couples' lawsuit sought damages for physical injuries, emotional suffering and medical expenses, while Jessica Hendrick claimed loss of consortium.
Academy Sports, however, argued that the PLCAA shields firearm retailers from liability when a third party unlawfully misuses a weapon.
The Hendricks argued that this case did not fall under the PLCAA’s “qualified civil liability action” category, as no firearm sale had occurred.
They alternatively requested to amend the lawsuit to invoke an exception in the Act for "negligent entrustment," which would apply if Academy had knowingly enabled access to a dangerous product.
The trial court dismissed the case, finding that the PLCAA applies broadly to cases where a firearm is used unlawfully, regardless of whether a sale occurred.
The court also denied Hendrick’s request to amend his complaint, stating that his allegations did not meet the legal requirements for negligent entrustment.
In the appeal, the Hendricks' argued the Act should not grant blanket immunity to gun sellers in cases where proper security measures were allegedly neglected.
The court, however, affirmed the dismissal, concluding that Hendricks' claims did not fit within any recognized exceptions to the PLCAA and that allowing an amendment would not change the outcome.
"Hendrick alleged that Defendants were negligent in failing to implement safeguards at an Academy Sports store concerning a firearm and ammunition, which were stolen at knifepoint and then used to shoot him several times," the court document states. "Hendrick raises two points on appeal. In his first point, he contends that the trial court erred in granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss because his claim did not constitute a 'qualified civil liability action' as defined by the PLCAA in that there was not a 'sale' of a firearm. In point two, Hendrick argues that the trial court erred in denying his alternative request to amend the petition pursuant to Rule 67.06 to allege a recognized exception in the PLCAA, negligent entrustment. The judgment is affirmed."
The ruling reinforces the PLCAA’s broad protection for firearm sellers against lawsuits involving the criminal use of guns by third parties.
The appellants were represented by William Carr, Taylor Arri and Bryan White of of Independence, Mo.
The respondents were represented by Byron Bowles Jr. and Alan Fogleman of Kansas City, Kan.; and Eric Harmon of St. Louis.
Attorneys declined to comment further on the case.
Missouri Court of Appeals-Western District case number: WD86911