McCarthy V. Amazon Com: Two Teenagers Acquire Sodium Nitrate To Commit Suicide

For years, Amazon claimed it was “only a marketplace” and therefore did not need to concern itself with product liability lawsuits. Today, the landscape has changed, and Amazon is facing product liability lawsuits, particularly because the online marketplace is in a position to protect the public from dangerous or defective products.

The lawsuit, McCarthy v. Amazon, centers on the tragic suicides of two minors, Ethan McCarthy and Kristine Jonsson. Both purchase highly concentrated sodium nitrate from a third-party vendor on Amazon’s platform.

What is sodium nitrate, and why is it dangerous? 

Sodium nitrate is commonly used in small quantities to cure meats. However, it is highly toxic in its concentrated form. An individual needs only to ingest a teaspoon for it to potentially be fatal. The product liability lawsuit, which was filed by parents of the deceased minors, alleges that Amazon is liable for their deaths because of its role in selling the chemical and its failure to adequately warn users of its potential dangers, or restrict its sale to minors. This is significant because online platforms such as Amazon traditionally argued that they are simply intermediaries and are thus not liable for defective or dangerous products sold by third-party vendors on their marketplace.

The plaintiff’s argument 

The plaintiffs argue that Amazon’s data collection and targeting capabilities should have alerted the site to the potential misuse of sodium nitrate. According to the lawsuit, Amazon receives user reviews mentioning the deadly nature of the substance and its potential use as a vehicle for suicide. The plaintiffs believe that Amazon removed reviews under the guise of violating community guidelines, which alerted customers to how dangerous the substance was. In addition, Amazon’s product recommendations also suggested purchasing a suicide manual and an anti-vomiting medication, along with the sodium nitrate. This demonstrates that Amazon is aware that the product can be used to take your own life. The plaintiffs argue that this amount of knowledge and control over the product makes Amazon responsible for the suicides.

Amazon’s counterargument 

Amazon, on the other hand, argues that the product label for the sodium nitrate clearly indicates the dangers of using the chemical. The company’s defense relied on the assertion that it had “no duty of care” to provide additional warnings, arguing that the two teens sought out the chemical for the purpose of committing suicide, and therefore, Amazon’s actions weren’t the direct cause of their deaths. The district court sided with Amazon and dismissed the case, but the plaintiffs have since appealed to the Ninth Circuit.

Significance of the case 

The outcome of McCarthy v. Amazon has significant implications for the future of Amazon’s liability and the level of responsibility they have toward its customers. If the Ninth Circuit rules against Amazon, it could impact how the company and other online marketplaces monitor and restrict the sale of potentially dangerous products.

Talk to a Florida Product Liability Lawyer Today 

Halpern, Santos & Pinkert represent the interests of injured plaintiffs in product liability lawsuits filed against retailers and manufacturers. Call our Florida personal injury lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.

Source:

epic.org/documents/mccarthy-v-amazon/#:~:text=The%20Plaintiffs%20in%20this%20case,the%20deaths%20of%20Plaintiffs’%20children.