Forrinx Technology News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog: Whether Amazon can be held strictly liable for products sold by third parties through its website is a question courts often face. In Loomis v. Amazon.com, LLC, No. 297995, 2021 Cal. App. LEXIS 347 (Apr. 26, 2021), the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District (Second District), held that, under the circumstances, Amazon could be held strictly liable. In this case, Kisha Loomis (Loomis), purchased a hoverboard on Amazon’s website from a seller identified as TurnUpUp in November of 2015. TurnUpUP was a name used by ...

A California court case over a flammable hoverboard could force Amazon to change its entire third-party sales business model insider@insider.com (Áine Cain) © Provided by Business Insider PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP via Getty Images In 2015, a woman named Kisha Loomis suffered burns when a hoverboard ordered on Amazon caught on fire in her house. Loomis sued Amazon in California, and saw her case against the tech giant receive a summary judgment. Amazon successfully argued that the hoverboard merchant "fell outside the chain of distribution," and that it was therefore not respo...

To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog: In August of 2020, a California Court of Appeal held that Amazon was subject to strict products liability for each and every product sold on its website. (See Bolger v. Amazon.com LLC (2020), 53 Cal.App.5th 431. You can read our full analysis of that opinion here. In short, the Court of Appeal held that, notwithstanding Amazon’s protestations, the company was within the vertical supply chain for the product, despite not falling within the classical definitions of designer, manufacturer, or distributor of the product in question. ...