History
  • No items yet
midpage
Morgan McMillan v. Amazon.com, Incorporated
983 F.3d 194
| 5th Cir. | 2020
Read the full case

Background

  • A toddler swallowed a button battery from a remote control purchased on Amazon; plaintiff McMillan sued Amazon and the listed seller (a third party using Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA)).
  • The listed seller ("USA Shopping 7693") used Amazon’s FBA program; Amazon stored, retrieved, shipped the item, collected payments, remitted proceeds minus fees, and handled FBA returns.
  • McMillan asserted strict liability (design and marketing defect), breach of implied warranty, negligence, and gross negligence against Amazon and the third-party seller; the third-party seller was never located or participated.
  • District court found Amazon was an "integral component in the chain of distribution," denied Amazon summary judgment on the question whether it was a "seller" under the Texas Products Liability Act, but granted judgment to Amazon on claims premised on editorial control (CDA-related).
  • Parties jointly sought interlocutory review; Fifth Circuit limited its review to whether Amazon qualifies as a "seller" under Texas law and certified that question to the Supreme Court of Texas because Texas precedent is sparse and the question is determinative and novel.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether Amazon is a "seller" under Texas products-liability law for third-party products sold via Amazon when Amazon does not hold title but controls aspects of transaction and delivery (FBA). Amazon placed the product into the stream of commerce: exercised control, had physical possession via FBA, delivered the product, collected and disbursed payments, earned fees, and could withhold payments. Amazon merely facilitates sales: it is a platform/marketplace or delivery-service-like intermediary (not in the business of selling the third-party product), it does not take title, and acts like an auctioneer/UPS rather than a seller. Fifth Circuit did not decide on the merits; it certified the question to the Supreme Court of Texas as a determinative novel state-law issue.
Whether FBA’s storage, retrieval, shipping, and returns processing converts Amazon from facilitator into a service-provider-seller. FBA shows Amazon had physical control and exercised meaningful control over distribution and customer interactions. FBA is an incidental service to enable third-party sales; service provision alone does not make Amazon a seller under Texas precedent. Court found the facts and applicable Texas law inconclusive and appropriate for state-court resolution; certified to Texas Supreme Court.
Whether existing out-of-state and federal decisions resolve the issue for Texas. Pointed to cases holding Amazon liable/seller in some jurisdictions and analogous reasoning supporting seller status. Pointed to numerous decisions finding Amazon not a seller; argued those authorities show Amazon is a facilitator. Fifth Circuit concluded out-of-state decisions are inconsistent and depend on differing state statutes/facts; they are not controlling for Texas.

Key Cases Cited

  • New Tex. Auto Auction Servs., L.P. v. Gomez de Hernandez, 249 S.W.3d 400 (Tex. 2008) (distinguishes entities that "place" products into commerce from those that merely "facilitate" sales)
  • Centerpoint Builders GP, LLC v. Trussway, Ltd., 496 S.W.3d 33 (Tex. 2016) (service-provider analysis; selling product is not established where product provision is incidental to services)
  • Firestone Steel Prods. Co. v. Barajas, 927 S.W.2d 608 (Tex. 1996) (holding that introducing a product into channels of commerce can suffice for seller status)
  • Fresh Coat, Inc. v. K-2, Inc., 318 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. 2010) (discusses when a service provider may be treated as a seller)
  • Erie Ins. Co. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 925 F.3d 135 (4th Cir. 2019) (illustrative federal decision addressing Amazon’s role; facts and state law differences noted)
  • Bolger v. Amazon.com, LLC, 53 Cal. App. 5th 431 (Cal. Ct. App. 2020) (California appellate decision treating Amazon as a seller in certain circumstances)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Morgan McMillan v. Amazon.com, Incorporated
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Date Published: Dec 18, 2020
Citation: 983 F.3d 194
Docket Number: 20-20108
Court Abbreviation: 5th Cir.