One year later: Louisville Old National Bank shooting survivors continue recovery

Stephanie “Dallas” Schwartz and Dana Mitchell were inside the downtown Louisville Old National Bank the morning of April 10, 2023, poised to begin yet another workday.

But that Monday proved to be anything but typical.

That morning, they encountered a 25-year-old co-worker, a syndications associate and portfolio banker at the bank, standing in the hallway outside the conference room with an AR-15 . He shot them both.

Schwartz attempted to call 911 but couldn’t get through to an emergency dispatcher in the aftermath.

Schwartz and Mitchell are two survivors of the mass shooting that killed five people and the gunman and injured eight others in the span of eight minutes.

Thomas Elliott, Jim Tutt, Josh Barrick, Deana Eckert and Juliana Farmer were fatally shot. The 63-year-old Elliott, a senior vice president at the bank, was a close friend of Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear.

One year later, Schwartz and Mitchell are attempting to recover mentally and physically from the scars inflicted on them that day. A lawsuit filed in January against River City Firearms details their experience the day of the shooting, and the year that followed.

They are advocating for change in state and federal gun laws.

But just like Mitchell’s call to 911 that tragic morning, their pleas for help and change aren’t getting through, they say.

Mitchell continues to suffer from nerve pain and severe emotional stress and post-traumatic stress disorder. She said in the lawsuit she aspires “to get to a point where it is not the first thing she thinks about every morning, and the last thing she thinks about every night.”

Schwartz was shot in the leg and spent a month between the hospital and rehabilitation center. She underwent two surgeries where she had a vein transplanted from her right leg. Her wound became infected, and she required a home health nurse three days a week for several months.

She is not able to sit, stand or walk for long periods of time and continues to have flashbacks of hiding in a bathroom stall.

Mitchell and Schwartz are among the six people listed as plaintiffs in a lawsuit against River City Firearms – the business which sold the gunman the firearm he used to carry out that attack — as well as accessories that made the gun more deadly.

What the lawsuit alleges

Family members of victims and survivors of the Old National Bank shooting have joined a lawsuit filed in Jefferson County Circuit Court against River City Firearms that was filed in state court in January. On April 8, the complaint was amended to add two companies as defendants — RSR Group Inc. and Magpul Industries Corporation — that sell firearms accessories.

The lawsuit alleges River City Firearms, a Louisville gun retailer, had a responsibility to notice the gunman, Connor Sturgeon, was not an experienced firearms user and should have declined to sell to him.

Instead, the lawsuit claims River City sold Sturgeon several add-ons to the assault-style firearm making it more deadly. These include a vertical power grip, red dot sight and three large-capacity extended magazines.

The lawsuit also accuses River City of negligence, wrongful death and deprivation of benefits of a parental and spousal relationship.

Federal law protects gunmakers from liability in many cases, but one exception is if the conduct of the company violated a state law.

Still, these cases can be difficult to win, experts say.

Tad Thomas, Louisville attorney for the plaintiffs, said the store’s indifference to red flags overrides River City’s legal protection.

“This is not an easy case but the lawyers that handle these cases — we do it for the right reasons and we keep doing them until we get some sort of change,” Thomas said.

Thomas claims one of the first red flags was Sturgeon’s odd behavior in the store when he went to purchase the firearm — averting others’ gaze in embarrassment and speaking softly.

A witness from the store recounted the obvious appearance of Sturgeon’s novice experience with firearms. A store employee had to show Sturgeon how to perform basic functions with the gun, such as how to load it, hold it and use certain features.

After the news of the shooting broke, one witness from River City who wasn’t identified in the lawsuit, told her husband, “I bet it was that kid at the store,” according to the lawsuit.

“It was obvious to the witness that Sturgeon had never handled a gun before,” the lawsuit reads. “Sturgeon also commented about the high cost of the firearm and accessories – despite purchasing one of the cheapest AR-15-style rifles on the market – further displaying his inexperience and ignorance about firearms.”

He paid $762.90, according to a store receipt.

Witnesses at the store said Sturgeon claimed he was buying the weapon for “home defense” after his friend’s home was broken into.

Thomas claims an apparent novice, such as Sturgeon, who expressed concern about the price of the weapon he bought, would be unlikely to seek out an AR-15-style rifle for home defense.

“Therefore, River City knew, or reasonably should have known, that, under all the circumstances, an AR-15-style rifle was not a suitable choice for home defense for this purchaser,” the lawsuit read.

In 23 seconds, Sturgeon was able to fire nearly 30 rounds inside the Old National Bank conference room. He reloaded a new magazine before exchanging fire with responding to police officers, who killed Sturgeon.

“If River City had not sold Sturgeon this extra (magazine), Sturgeon would not have been able to continue firing. Instead, bullets continued to rain down on innocents until Sturgeon was incapacitated,” the lawsuit said.

While the lawsuit has been in the works for sometime, Thomas predicts the negotiation process that could lead to a trial could continue into the second anniversary of the shooting.

The goal would be to get to a trial and to have an outcome that enacts change.

“As far as I am concerned, for me, we should all be able to agree that someone who has never owned a gun before and in a mental health crisis should not be able to walk into a gun shop and buy what is a weapon of mass destruction,” Thomas told the Herald-Leader. “And be sold all of the pieces to make it more deadly.

“I don’t care what political perspective you come from, there has to be a way we can prevent that in the future.”

Bill to help gun safety failed

Several family membes of the victims went to the Capitol in Frankfort during the 2024 legislative session to advocate for a bill that supporters said could temporarily stop people like Sturgeon from accessing guns.

The CARR bill, an acronym for Crisis Aversion and Rights Retention orders, was introduced by Sen. Whitney Westerfield in a bid to create a narrow legal pathway to remove firearms from those who may pose a risk to themselves or others.

But it was to be done in a way, the Fruit Hill Republican said, that protects people and their constitutional rights.

At a committee hearing in December, Westerfield mentioned the Old National Bank shooting and that Sturgeon was able to buy a gun without any safeguards in place.

“I think if — again, I can’t speak for any of you — but if you knew that the shooter at the bank in Louisville in April was gonna go and shoot all those people, if you knew in advance, I don’t think anybody in here would arm him,” Westerfield said.

Westerfield’s bill was filed in January, but it failed to even score a committee hearing in the Kentucky Republican-controlled legislature.

With just two days left in the 2024 General Assembly, CARR has run out of time to pass.