As most of you know, Amazon has been fighting products liability claims across the country for some time now. While the company has been successful at stopping a tidal wave of litigation from injured users in the past, a recent decision made in Wisconsin sided with the plaintiff.
The court held that Amazon was so deeply involved with the transaction at issue that it was an entity that could be held strictly liable under Wisconsin law. It also held that 47 U.S.C. § 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) did not immunize Amazon because its liability was not based on posting content from a third party.
In State Farm, Luke Cain (Cain), who was insured by State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (State Farm), purchased a bathtub faucet adapter from a third-party seller on Amazon.com. The third-party seller was XMJ, a Chinese company with no presence in the United States. A month after purchasing the item, the adapter failed due to a defect, causing flooding in Cain’s home. State Farm paid for repairs associated with the flooding and brought this subrogation action against Amazon.
Thereafter, Amazon filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that: 1) it was not a “seller” within the meaning of Wisconsin’s products liability statute, Wis. Stat. § 895.047; and 2) the CDA prohibited treating it as a “publisher” of third-party content posted on its website.
In its analysis, the court looked at several key facts about XMJ’s relationship with Amazon and Amazon’s services to Cain as the purchaser. It noted that Amazon provided payment processing and guaranteed the purchases. It also highlighted that XMJ participated in Amazon’s Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA) program, pursuant to which Amazon stored XMJ’s products and fulfilled its orders. Amazon also required XMJ to register its products for sale and reserved the right to refuse registration. In addition, Amazon required XMJ to indemnify Amazon for any injury or property damage caused by XMJ’s products.
Upon analyzing the applicability of the Wisconsin strict liability statute, Wis. Stat. § 895.047(2), the court easily determined that the unknown manufacturer would be liable and that it was not subject to process in Wisconsin. Thus, the only question remaining was whether the plaintiff could recover from Amazon in the manufacturer’s absence. The court disagreed with Amazon’s argument that it could not be held liable as a seller because it never took title to the product.
Instead, the court held that Wisconsin’s statute does not restrict liability for defective products to a narrow class such as sellers or distributors. Rather, the statute limits the circumstances under which a plaintiff can hold a non-manufacturing defendant liable. Because the court found that Amazon took on more than a peripheral role in putting the defective product into the stream of commerce, the court held that State Farm could hold Amazon liable as a seller or distributor.
The court also declined to apply the immunity provided in the CDA to Amazon.
The CDA provides immunity to interactive computer services from claims based on content written and provided by third parties. Since the products liability claim at issue was not based on whether Amazon published XMJ’s product listing but, rather, on Amazon’s role in the chain of distribution, the court held that the CDA did not apply. Thus, the court denied Amazon’s motion for summary judgment. Soon after it did so, the parties settled the case.
This case is just one of several addressing the evolving status of Amazon as a product seller and its claim for immunity from products liability claims based on the CDA.
Although this case isn’t taking place in Nevada, it serves as a reminder of how important it is to obtain all of the facts regarding Amazon’s involvement in the posting, sale and shipment of the product at issue. The strength of a strict liability case against Amazon may likely dependent on several key elements specific to your case, such as the seller’s involvement in Amazon’s FBA program.
As more Amazon cases are decided and parties appeal to various courts, the evolution of Amazon’s products liability and CDA defenses is sure to continue.
If you or your client has been injured by a product you purchased from Amazon or any other business, call us to discuss your case. Our presence can drastically increase it’s value for you or your firm.
Trial Attorney Las Vegas
Hire a Successful Trial Attorney for Your Upcoming Business or Personal Case
Hiring the right trial attorney to represent your interest, whether it be a business lawsuit or a personal injury case, it’s a decision that can pay off. It’s important for you to understand your limitations and rights when it comes to filing a civil case, and you’ll want to be sure to hire someone not only with the experience but also the capacity to give your case the attention it needs. Not all Trial Attorneys in Las Vegas are created equal, so when you do your personal vetting, make sure to ask about caseload, client load, and past similar experiences before retaining counsel for your trial.
Protecting your business is a necessary step in ensuring your future and securing your personal wealth. There are a variety of business litigation types and various situations in which you’ll want to retain legal counsel to help settle a dispute. This may include cases of injury occurring at your place of business, potential product liability, or accusations of negligence or unsafe working conditions. A good trial attorney from Las Vegas can explain both the local and state laws that govern potential rulings and judgments and also advise you of the best options on whether to settle or go to trial.
A Gamble that Pays Off
If you find yourself needing a trial lawyer for your personal injury cases, find someone well versed and knowledgeable on how to seek compensation to pay for your ongoing medical expenses, wages and salary lost from missing work due to the injury. Also, consider the long-term impact of the injury on your ability to provide for yourself and your dependents. An experienced trial attorney often receives referrals from other inexperienced personal injury attorneys, especially on difficult cases, or cases where there is gross negligence. Maximize your payout by retaining someone with a successful record, past similar experience, and a great reputation within the local industry. If you want the same trial attorney from beginning to end of your trial rather than one who passes you on to another trial lawyer because you can’t settle, then look for someone with the best trial experience. In Nevada, that trial lawyer is Dennis Prince at The DPLG.
Las Vegas Trial Lawyer Dennis Prince Obtains 7-Figure Jury Verdict on Behalf of Car Accident Victim Hit by a Forklift While Driving a Work Vehicle
LAS VEGAS (Sept. 30, 2019) – Dennis Prince, one of Las Vegas, Nevada’s most respected trial lawyers, has obtained a 7-figure jury verdict on behalf of a car accident victim facing severe and debilitating injuries.
Following four days of jury selection, the trial of Bahram Yahyavi v. Capriati Construction Corp., Inc. began September 13, 2019. The case arose from a June 19, 2013 incident in which Mr. Yahyavi’s Dodge Charger, which he was driving as part of his job with Chapman Las Vegas Dodge, was struck by a forklift driven by a former employee of Defendant Capriati Construction Corp., Inc.
The forks penetrated Mr. Yahyavi’s front end from the passenger’s side, caused the front windshield to cave into the car, and came dangerously close to Mr. Yahyavi’s head. The forklift driver was instructed to not operate a forklift by Capriati Construction’s former safety manager prior to the subject collision.
Mr. Yahyavi sustained a severe and debilitating injury to his neck as a result of the collision. After Mr. Yahyavi exhausted all conservative care options, which included chiropractic care, physical therapy, and pain injection therapy, he underwent a five-level cervical spine fusion surgery.
Following a 15-day jury trial, Capriati Construction was found liable for causing the subject collision and Mr. Yahyavi’s injuries. The jury unanimously awarded Mr. Yahyavi damages in the amount of $5,870,283.24.
About Prince Law Group
Prince Law Group is an award-winning Las Vegas based boutique litigation law firm dedicated to the aggressive representation of clients suffering from the devastating injuries caused by the negligence of another. Built upon the extensive background and experience of Dennis Prince in the areas of trial practice, personal injury, insurance law, and commercial litigation, Prince Law Group offers a sophisticated level of representation and a team approach where each trial lawyer plays to his or her strengths in order to effectively protect our client’s rights up to the time of trial. We comprehensively and seamlessly prepare each case for trial in court. Prince Law Group also pursues forms of alternative dispute resolution such as mediation and arbitration when it is in the best interest of the client. Learn more by visiting our website at thedplg.com.
Amazon Is Now a Seller Under Wisconsin’s Products Liability Law
As most of you know, Amazon has been fighting products liability claims across the country for some time now. While the company has been successful at stopping a tidal wave of litigation from injured users in the past, a recent decision made in Wisconsin sided with the plaintiff.
In the case of State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122316, 2019 WL 3304887, the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin denied the motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Amazon.com, Inc. (Amazon).
The court held that Amazon was so deeply involved with the transaction at issue that it was an entity that could be held strictly liable under Wisconsin law. It also held that 47 U.S.C. § 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) did not immunize Amazon because its liability was not based on posting content from a third party.
In State Farm, Luke Cain (Cain), who was insured by State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (State Farm), purchased a bathtub faucet adapter from a third-party seller on Amazon.com. The third-party seller was XMJ, a Chinese company with no presence in the United States. A month after purchasing the item, the adapter failed due to a defect, causing flooding in Cain’s home. State Farm paid for repairs associated with the flooding and brought this subrogation action against Amazon.
Thereafter, Amazon filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that: 1) it was not a “seller” within the meaning of Wisconsin’s products liability statute, Wis. Stat. § 895.047; and 2) the CDA prohibited treating it as a “publisher” of third-party content posted on its website.
In its analysis, the court looked at several key facts about XMJ’s relationship with Amazon and Amazon’s services to Cain as the purchaser. It noted that Amazon provided payment processing and guaranteed the purchases. It also highlighted that XMJ participated in Amazon’s Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA) program, pursuant to which Amazon stored XMJ’s products and fulfilled its orders. Amazon also required XMJ to register its products for sale and reserved the right to refuse registration. In addition, Amazon required XMJ to indemnify Amazon for any injury or property damage caused by XMJ’s products.
Upon analyzing the applicability of the Wisconsin strict liability statute, Wis. Stat. § 895.047(2), the court easily determined that the unknown manufacturer would be liable and that it was not subject to process in Wisconsin. Thus, the only question remaining was whether the plaintiff could recover from Amazon in the manufacturer’s absence. The court disagreed with Amazon’s argument that it could not be held liable as a seller because it never took title to the product.
Instead, the court held that Wisconsin’s statute does not restrict liability for defective products to a narrow class such as sellers or distributors. Rather, the statute limits the circumstances under which a plaintiff can hold a non-manufacturing defendant liable. Because the court found that Amazon took on more than a peripheral role in putting the defective product into the stream of commerce, the court held that State Farm could hold Amazon liable as a seller or distributor.
The court also declined to apply the immunity provided in the CDA to Amazon.
The CDA provides immunity to interactive computer services from claims based on content written and provided by third parties. Since the products liability claim at issue was not based on whether Amazon published XMJ’s product listing but, rather, on Amazon’s role in the chain of distribution, the court held that the CDA did not apply. Thus, the court denied Amazon’s motion for summary judgment. Soon after it did so, the parties settled the case.
This case is just one of several addressing the evolving status of Amazon as a product seller and its claim for immunity from products liability claims based on the CDA.
Although this case isn’t taking place in Nevada, it serves as a reminder of how important it is to obtain all of the facts regarding Amazon’s involvement in the posting, sale and shipment of the product at issue. The strength of a strict liability case against Amazon may likely dependent on several key elements specific to your case, such as the seller’s involvement in Amazon’s FBA program.
As more Amazon cases are decided and parties appeal to various courts, the evolution of Amazon’s products liability and CDA defenses is sure to continue.
If you or your client has been injured by a product you purchased from Amazon or any other business, call us to discuss your case. Our presence can drastically increase it’s value for you or your firm.
Consumer Reports’ Study Suggests 1 in 6 Uber and Lyft Cars Have Open Safety Recalls
Among the tens of thousands of Uber and Lyft vehicles registered to operate in New York City, there’s a 2011 Hyundai Sonata GLS with eight unaddressed safety recalls that range from a potential seat-belt detachment to even more alarming examples, such as possible engine failure.
“Uber and Lyft are letting down their customers and jeopardizing their trust,” says William Wallace, a CR safety policy advocate. “Uber’s website says people can ‘ride with confidence,’ while Lyft promises ‘peace of mind,’ yet both companies fail to ensure that rideshare cars are free from safety defects that could put passengers at risk.”
As Uber and Lyft announced becoming multibillion-dollar IPOs earlier this year, CR decided to check on the safety of the privately owned vehicles that are key to company operations and are now used by more than 100 million consumers.
CR reviewed safety records for about 94,000 vehicles registered as operating for the companies in NYC and King County, Wash. (home to Seattle), two major ride-hailing hubs with local governments that require drivers to register vehicles and obtain an additional license to work through regulators. The CR analysis of the data is meant to provide a snapshot of open safety recalls among ride-hailing cars in the industry, but it might not reflect the national market.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL REPORT ON THE CONSUMER AFFAIRS WEBSITE
Infant Birth Injury Warning Signs and Symptoms
Most birth injuries involve serious complications that can lead to permanent disabilities and disfigurement, especially if not treated immediately. Left untreated, these injuries can develop into severe consequences that can also lead to your child developing a brain trauma or paralysis. As a new parent, it’s critical to understand and be on the lookout for the warning signs and symptoms children can experience following delivery.
Here are some immediate warning signs and symptoms your child has suffered a birth injury:
Actions Symptoms:
Health-Related Symptoms:
Muscle and Bone Symptoms:
Symptoms That May Surface Between 12-24 Months of Age
Although a birth injury may have happened just before, during, or after delivery, the body takes a while to demonstrate its symptoms, sometimes into toddler-hood.
The common birth injury symptoms that appear during the toddler years include:
Developmental Milestones:
Infants, toddlers, and children who miss developmental milestones may have experienced a birth injury.
2 to 4 months old:
6 to 9 months old:
1 years old:
18 months old:
2-3 years old:
4-5 years old:
Keep in mind that only a physician can diagnose disabilities and disorders. If your child is showing signs of birth injuries or is behind in developmental milestones, call a medical professional for help.
If you believe a medical professional or hospital is responsible for your child’s birth injury, contact my office today to discuss your case. We can help make sure your child obtains the compensation they need to live their life to the fullest.
Here’s What Hospitals Should do to Prevent Women From Experiencing Hypertension During Childbirth
Please join us in our efforts to bring awareness to the preventable injuries that take place in hospitals every day and share this post with your friends and family.
We are dedicated to helping pregnant women and their families obtain the maximum possible compensation for injuries they’ve sustained during the delivery process. Contact my office today with questions about your case!
New Study Finds Child Brain Injury Linked to Everyday Household Items
About 72% of traumatic brain injury-related emergency department visits among children are attributable to consumer products, according to a study recently published in the journal Brain Injury earlier this year.
The study found that the top 10 leading products contributing to non-fatal traumatic brain injuries in children younger than a year to 19 years old are:
Traumatic brain injury or TBI occurs when a sudden trauma — such as a bump, blow or jolt — causes damage to the brain.
The new study involved national estimates of approximately 4.1 million non-fatal traumatic brain injuries in children and adolescents in the United States between 2010 and 2013. The data came from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System and the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System-All Injury Program.
The data showed that the most common product groups related to TBIs in children were related to sports and recreation, which was linked to 28.8% of injuries; home furnishings and fixtures, tied to 17.2% of injuries; home structures and construction materials, tied to 17.1% of injuries; child nursery equipment, tied to 2.7% of injuries, and toys, tied to 2.4%, among other products.
Traumatic brain injuries from home furnishings and fixtures, primarily beds, were highest among infants and children up to 4 years old. Whereas traumatic brain injuries from sports and recreation — especially football, bicycles and basketball — were highest among children ages 5 to 19.
The new study had some limitations, including that the severity of these injuries were not investigated and the data included only patients admitted to emergency departments.
The researchers recommended strategies to prevent TBI in children around the home, including removing tripping hazards such as area rugs; improving lighting; avoiding hard surface playgrounds; increasing use of home safety devices such as stair gates; and using stairway handrails without sharp edges, among other strategies.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a set of guidelines last year for the diagnosis, treatment and long-term care of children and teens with traumatic brain injuries.
If you or your child has experienced a brain injury of any kind, contact us today to schedule some time to talk about your case. We can help you get your life back on track.
The Only Way to Become a Great Trial Lawyer is by Doing it
Las Vegas Trial Lawyer
As new a trial lawyer you can rehearse, you can do mock trials, you can do focus groups all you like, but until you’re in front of a live jury with a real client where the stakes are real, there is no replacement for the trial and error of being a trial lawyer and actually doing it.
That’s the art of trial advocacy. And that’s where my 25 years and more than 100 jury trials come into play. I’ve seen things dozens, if not hundreds of times that most lawyers haven’t. I know what the potential pitfalls are of trials. In particular, nowadays, expert witnesses drive trials in virtually every type of civil case. These individuals are being paid tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in cases they’re serving as professional expert witnesses. Unless you have had the experience of cross-examining a smart, difficult expert witness who can inflict real harm on your case, you should not be taking a case to trial. You need to have the experience of someone who is very seasoned as a trial lawyer who has not only seen it all before but has a vast array of experience in dealing with expert witnesses of all types so you can better understand what plays well and what presents well to a jury.
The Cross
The art of cross-examination of expert witnesses is something that can only be accomplished through seasoned experience as a trial lawyer. My team and I have a unique understanding of what works in front of juries and what doesn’t work. We’ve polled thousands of jurors following trials to find out exactly what they liked, what they saw, and what they would like to see us improve upon. Unless you have had the full opportunity to speak to jurors who have actually served as a juror in a case after weeks of trial testimony and making a decision based upon all the evidence they heard, you don’t have the full story and you certainly don’t have the feedback you need to evolve your level of trial experience. While focus groups are important and play a very important role, presenting your case in front of a jury, making real opening statements and finding your preferred presentation method is the only true way to become a great trial lawyer.
These days, most lawyers go to trial maybe 5 or 10 times in their career while I personally go somewhere between 5 to 10 times every year. It is that level of experience that enables me and my law firm to ask for millions or even tens of millions of dollars. We have the experience, knowledge base, and tools to persuade juries and judges to find in our client’s favor.
Contact the best Trial Lawyer in Las Vegas
If you or your firm is considering taking a case to trial, contact my office today to schedule some time to talk about how we can help. Our presence on the team can dramatically increase its value.
Meet Kevin T. Strong, Associate Attorney at Prince Law Group
At the conclusion of his judicial clerkship in 2012, Kevin worked as an associate attorney for a law firm specializing in insurance defense. He conducted legal research, drafted various pleadings and motions, reviewed and analyzed medical records, and conducted client interviews to gather the necessary facts to evaluate injury claims on behalf of various insurance companies. Kevin’s strong work ethic proved to be very valuable to help attorneys and partners litigate various matters involving personal injury and workplace discrimination and achieve successful resolution.
For the last five years, Kevin has gained extensive knowledge and expertise litigating matters involving personal injury and insurance law on behalf of plaintiffs. He also gained extensive experience in appellate law. Kevin drafted various briefs in numerous cases before the Nevada Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Two of those matters resulted in the issuance of published decisions by the Nevada Supreme Court.
Kevin was admitted to the Nevada Bar in 2010. He is also admitted to the United States District Court, District of Nevada and was recently admitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Kevin is a lifelong Las Vegan. He attended Bishop Gorman High School and graduated in 2002. From there, he attended the University of Nevada-Las Vegas (UNLV) for undergraduate school. In 2007, Kevin graduated Cum Laude with a Bachelor of Science (B.S.) Degree in Finance and a Minor in Business Law. He was also a member of the Golden Key National Honor Society. He next attended law school at the William S. Boyd School of Law at UNLV and earned his Juris Doctor (J.D.) in 2010. Kevin graduated in the top third of his class at the Boyd School of Law and was a member of the Real Estate Law Society and the Student Mentoring Program.
Kevin enjoys spending time with his wife, Amy, and their puppy, Kramer. He is very active in the community and has volunteered for various non-profit organizations including the Salvation Army. Kevin has also volunteered to help children who are part of the foster care system resulting from abuse or neglect. In his spare time, Kevin enjoys exercising, often volunteering and participating in local charity races, and has recently begun to take piano lessons.
Amazon Can Be Held Liable for Third-Party Seller Products: U.S. Appeals Court
A federal appeals court last week ruled against Amazon.com in a case that could expose the online retailer to lawsuits from customers who buy defective products from third-party vendors through its website.
Numerous other courts, including two federal appeals courts, have held that Amazon cannot be held liable as a seller of products from third-party vendors. The new ruling from the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, which reversed a lower court decision, appeared to be the first to buck that trend.
In addition to selling its own inventory, Amazon allows third-party vendors to list products for sale on its website. Such vendors may store their products in Amazon’s warehouses or ship them directly to customers.
In last Wednesday’s opinion, Circuit Judge Jane Richards Roth, writing for a 2-1 majority of a three-judge panel, said Amazon may be liable in part because its business model “enables third-party vendors to conceal themselves from the customer, leaving customers injured by defective products with no direct recourse to the third-party vendor.”
The panel sent the case back to the lower court, which will have to decide whether the leash was actually defective.
Click here to read the full story on Reuters.