Products Liability Law Reporter

A New York trial court held that summary judgment for Amazon was not warranted in a case alleging it was liable for a house fire resulting from a defective thermostat controller purchased from a third-party seller on its online platform.

Pamela Mead purchased an Anself RF344 wireless thermostat controller through Amazon.com. After the product was installed at Mead’s home, it caused a fire that damaged the premises. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. sued Amazon.com Services, Inc., seeking to recoup the damages incurred as a result of the fire. The defense moved for summary judgment, arguing that because it was not the thermostat controller’s seller, it was not strictly liable for the plaintiff’s damages.

Denying the motion, the trial court found that strict liability may be imposed on retailers and distributors of allegedly defective products. Although Amazon did not take title to the thermostat controller, the court said, it exercised sufficient control over the product to be considered a retailer or distributor. The court reasoned that where, such as here, products are purchased through a Fulfillment by Amazon transaction, Amazon maintains possession of the product, uses its employees to handle the product, sets the rules of the transaction, and interacts with consumers during the purchase and where a problem arises. Citing case law, the court held that Amazon should not receive the benefits of a brick-and-mortar storefront while avoiding any of the associated responsibilities.

Thus, the court concluded that Amazon had failed to meet its burden to obtain summary judgment.

Citation: State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Amazon.com Servs., Inc., 2020 WL 7234265 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Onondaga Cty. Dec. 8, 2020).

Plaintiff counsel: Dennis D. Murphy, White Plains, N.Y.