A civil lawsuit has been filed against a Kentucky gun shop that sold a mass shooter an AR-15 style rifle which was used days later to kill workers at Old National Bank in Louisville, Kentucky, last April. The lawsuit accuses federally licensed dealer River City Firearms of failing to detect red flags when the shooter, 25-year-old Connor Sturgeon, purchased the weapon.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of victims and survivors of the mass shooting. The plaintiffs include four survivors and the wives of victims Joshua Barrick and Jim Tutt. The families are represented by lawyers from the Chicago-based law firm Romanucci & Blandin, and attorney Tad Thomas with Everytown Law, a Washington-based firm that advocates for gun safety.

Sturgeon was an employee at the bank and had purchased the gun just six days before the shooting. His family would later share during a national news interview that their son had struggled with mental illness, but that they could have never imagined their son would act in such a violent way.

His mother Lisa Sturgeon shared with NBC News, “We had no real indications that something like this could have happened. There was no clear tell.” She adds, “It would have been bad enough if we had just lost our son. But for him to take others with us — with him — it’s just — it’s beyond what we've taught him, the way we live. We're always saying do no harm. He didn't do that.”

The family expressed their struggle with their grief, sharing they felt apprehensive speaking out about their son’s actions because they were concerned “about inadvertently being disrespectful to the families” their son’s actions harmed. Lisa Sturgeon has also publicly shared her struggle with the guilt of her son's actions. On the morning of the shooting, Sturgeon’s roommate called Lisa Sturgeon to alert her that her son was going to “shoot up Old National.” She called 911 to alert authorities, but her son had already arrived at the bank.

As a federally licensed dealer, River City Firearms would have undergone training “to spot individuals who are incapable of handling firearms responsibly or may have nefarious intentions,” says Tad Thomas. Despite this, Thomas says the gun shop failed to spot red flags and stop the sale.

Generally, gun manufacturers are shielded from civil lawsuits under the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, or PLCAA. This law gives gun makers immunity from being sued over the actions of the people who purchase their guns. In recent years, this law has been challenged by victims and families impacted by mass shootings. In 2022, gunmaker Remington Arms settled with victims in a $73 million lawsuit after a gunman used one of its AR-15-style rifles at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.

The lawsuit against River City Firearms details that when Sturgeon came into the gun shop to purchase the AR-15 style rifle, he appeared to have little knowledge of firearms and seemingly appeared “embarrassed” during the purchase. He was also described as having an “unusually quiet tone.” One woman who spent nearly 20 minutes near Sturgeon at the shop felt compelled to call the police, but did not, according to the complaint.

The lawsuit highlights that the gun shop had a “legal duty” to keep potential buyers who appear to be reasonably dangerous to others from purchasing a gun. “Given the red flags that Sturgeon presented at the time of purchase, it was a reckless dereliction of duty for River City to negligently entrust him with an AR-15-style rifle,” says the plaintiffs’ legal team.

They add, “Sturgeon pulled the trigger of the assault rifle that killed, wounded, and traumatized the employees—his coworkers—at Old National Bank. But River City’s negligence was also a substantial cause of harm to each of the Plaintiffs.”

Alongside his display of a limited knowledge of firearms, the lawsuit accuses the shop of failing to recognize the suspicious purchase considering the AR-15 style rifle Sturgeon had purchased has “become the go-to weapon for young men intent on causing mass destruction.”

His total purchase included a Radical Firearms RF-15, 120 rounds, a red-dot sight, a vertical grip, and four magazine cartridges, amounting to a sale price of $762. In his private journal, Sturgeon details that it “was so easy” to purchase the firearm. “Seriously, I knew it would be doable but this is ridiculous,” he writes.

His journal also notes his struggle with mental health illness as he describes himself as being “very sick.” And while Sturgeon had noted in his journal days before the shooting what he was planning to do, officials did not find “evidence of long-term planning,” during their investigation.

Sturgeon’s family has since shared they also plan to file a lawsuit against the makers of the AR-15-style rifle their son was able to purchase.

With this newly filed lawsuit, the victims are seeking unspecified compensatory damages, punitive damages, and other losses.