Amazon Product Liability in California: Can You Sue Amazon for a Defective Product?

By Jillian F. Hayes, Esq. · Last updated May 20, 2026

The Old Rule: Amazon Hid Behind "We're Just a Platform"

For years, Amazon's defense to product liability claims was straightforward. The company argued it was merely a venue, like a flea market or shopping mall. The actual seller was the third-party merchant who listed the product. Amazon claimed it didn't make the product, didn't take title to it, didn't pick it, didn't ship it. The argument worked. Federal courts in several states accepted some version of it. Plaintiffs found themselves trying to collect from sellers based in China or other jurisdictions, often with no realistic chance of recovery.

That worked until California changed the answer.

Bolger v. Amazon: The Decision That Changed Everything

In August 2020, the California Court of Appeal decided Bolger v. Amazon.com, LLC. The plaintiff, Angela Bolger, purchased a replacement laptop battery on Amazon from a third-party seller called Lenoge Technology. The battery exploded weeks later, leaving her with severe burns. Lenoge was a Chinese company. Recovering from Lenoge was a practical impossibility. Bolger sued Amazon directly.

Amazon raised its usual defenses: it wasn't the seller, it didn't manufacture the product, the third-party seller was the responsible party. The trial court agreed and granted summary judgment for Amazon.

The Court of Appeal reversed. The panel held that Amazon could be held strictly liable for the defective battery. The court focused on what Amazon actually did in the transaction:

• Amazon took possession of Lenoge's inventory in its warehouse
• Amazon set the rules for how products were listed and described
• Amazon processed the payment
• Amazon controlled communication with the buyer
• Amazon picked, packed, and shipped the product
• Amazon was the only entity Bolger ever interacted with as a buyer

That level of involvement, the court held, placed Amazon within the chain of distribution. Under California's strict product liability doctrine (which goes back to Greenman v. Yuba Power Products in 1963), every entity in the chain of distribution can be held strictly liable for a defective product that causes injury.

Loomis v. Amazon: The Confirmation

Some defendants tried to limit Bolger to its specific facts. They argued the case was about replacement batteries specifically, or about Amazon's particular relationship with Lenoge, or about the specific warehousing arrangement.

In April 2021, the California Court of Appeal addressed those arguments in Loomis v. Amazon.com LLC. The plaintiff was burned when a hoverboard she purchased through Amazon caught fire and ignited her home. The seller was again a third-party listing.

The court applied Bolger directly and held Amazon could be strictly liable. The decision made clear that Bolger was not a one-off. The same chain-of-distribution analysis would apply to any product where Amazon played the same functional role.

FBA vs. Non-FBA: A Real Distinction

"Fulfilled by Amazon" (FBA) is a service where third-party sellers ship their inventory to Amazon's warehouses. Amazon then handles storage, picking, packing, shipping, returns, and customer service. From the buyer's perspective, an FBA order looks identical to a direct Amazon order.

Both Bolger and Loomis involved FBA shipments. That fact mattered to the courts' reasoning. The deeper Amazon's operational involvement, the easier it is to place Amazon in the chain of distribution.

Cases involving third-party sellers who use their own fulfillment (sometimes called "merchant fulfilled") are more contested. Amazon's role is more limited: it provides the listing, processes payment, and handles dispute resolution, but it does not touch the product. Some federal courts have declined to extend strict liability to those transactions. California state courts have continued to focus on the totality of Amazon's role, but the analysis is fact-specific.

For practical purposes, FBA cases are the strongest. Most injuries from defective consumer products purchased on Amazon involve FBA inventory.

What You Have to Prove

A California product liability claim against Amazon requires the same elements as any other product liability case:

1. The product was defective. Design defect, manufacturing defect, or failure to warn. The plaintiff must point to a specific defect, usually with the help of an expert.
2. The defect existed when Amazon distributed the product. The plaintiff did not modify or damage it after delivery.
3. The defect caused the injury. Medical and engineering evidence usually connects the defect to the harm.
4. The plaintiff was injured. Documented damages, including medical bills, lost wages, and other losses.

Whether Amazon is in the chain of distribution is the additional element specific to Amazon cases. After Bolger and Loomis, that element is now answered as a matter of law for many transactions, particularly FBA orders.

Common Amazon Product Injuries

The product categories that produce the most injury claims tend to share some characteristics: cheap, imported, sold by sellers without strong U.S. legal presence, often with thin or inaccurate documentation. Categories where claims commonly arise include:

• Replacement batteries (laptops, e-cigarettes, power tools)
• Hoverboards and other lithium-battery-powered devices
• Phone chargers and cables that overheat or cause fires
• Children's toys with small parts, lead paint, or magnets
• Cosmetics and skincare products with undisclosed ingredients
• Counterfeit or off-brand car parts and accessories
• Kitchen appliances that overheat or fail to function safely
• Bicycle helmets and other "safety" gear that does not meet standards
• Knock-off home appliances with electrical failures

If the product carries a recognized U.S. brand and is sold by Amazon directly, the brand owner is usually the primary defendant. The Amazon claim is the backup. When the third-party seller is the only "manufacturer" and is overseas, the Amazon claim often becomes the only realistic path to recovery.

Why Amazon's Defenses Usually Lose

After Bolger and Loomis, Amazon's lawyers still raise the same arguments, but with limited success in California state courts. The recurring defenses:

"We're not the seller." Rejected when Amazon was deeply involved in fulfillment. Courts look at function, not labels.

"The third-party seller has the indemnity." Amazon's contracts with third-party sellers require them to indemnify Amazon. This is a contract dispute between Amazon and the seller. It does not relieve Amazon of liability to the injured consumer. Amazon pays the consumer, then seeks indemnity from the seller.

"The Communications Decency Act §230 protects us." Section 230 protects platforms from liability for third-party content (like product reviews and listings). It does not protect platforms from product liability claims for defective products themselves. Bolger explicitly rejected the §230 defense.

"The Conditions of Use require arbitration." Sometimes successful, sometimes not. The terms must be properly disclosed and agreed to. Family members of the buyer who were injured but did not personally agree to the terms can often proceed in court rather than arbitration.

Practical Steps After an Amazon-Related Injury

What to do, in order, in the first week:

1. Get medical treatment. Document everything from the first emergency visit forward.
2. Do not return the product. Amazon will try to recover it. The defective product is the most important evidence in the case. Photograph it from every angle, save the packaging, and store the item in a safe place.
3. Pull the Amazon order history. Screenshot or print the order confirmation, the product listing, the seller information, the fulfillment method (FBA or merchant fulfilled), and any reviews.
4. Save communications. Any messages with Amazon customer service, any replies from the seller, any return or refund offers.
5. Identify witnesses. Anyone who saw the injury occur or saw the product fail.
6. Talk to an attorney before talking to Amazon legal. Amazon will offer a refund. Refund offers are not settlements, but they can lead to "release" language that compromises the claim if you sign without legal review.

The Refund vs. the Lawsuit

Most people contact Amazon customer service first. Amazon often refunds the purchase price and may offer additional credits or a small gesture toward medical bills. That refund is not the case. A refund typically covers the cost of the product, not the medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, or future treatment.

For minor injuries with limited medical costs, a refund and small settlement may be the practical resolution. For serious injuries (burns from battery fires, fractures from defective ladders or step stools, chemical injuries from cosmetics, severe child injuries from toys), the actual damages routinely exceed the refund amount by orders of magnitude.

The lawsuit path is also where Amazon's incentives line up with the injured person's. Once a real case is filed, Amazon's legal department takes the matter seriously rather than treating it as a customer service issue.

Statute of Limitations: Two Years From Injury

California's general two-year statute of limitations applies. Under Code of Civil Procedure §335.1, the claim must be filed within two years of the injury, not within two years of the purchase. For latent injuries that show up later (chemical exposure, slow-developing burns or scarring), the discovery rule may extend that deadline, but it should not be relied on without legal advice.

Wrongful death cases (battery fires, hoverboard fires, defective car seat injuries) have their own two-year clock from the date of death under California Code of Civil Procedure §377.60. Minor victims have additional tolling protections under §352.

Frequently Asked Questions About Amazon Product Liability

Can you sue Amazon for a defective product in California?

Yes. Under Bolger v. Amazon (2020) and Loomis v. Amazon (2021), California courts held that Amazon can be strictly liable for defective products sold through its platform, even when the product was sold by a third-party seller. Amazon is treated as part of the chain of distribution.

What is Bolger v. Amazon?

Bolger v. Amazon.com, LLC (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 431 is a California Court of Appeal decision holding that Amazon could be held strictly liable for a defective replacement laptop battery sold by a third-party seller on its Marketplace. The case established that Amazon's role in the transaction placed it within the chain of distribution.

What is Loomis v. Amazon?

Loomis v. Amazon.com LLC (2021) 63 Cal.App.5th 466 extended Bolger to a different fact pattern, holding Amazon strictly liable for a defective hoverboard that caught fire. The case confirmed Bolger was not limited to its specific facts.

Does it matter if the seller was Amazon or a third party?

Under current California law, Amazon can be strictly liable whether the product was sold by Amazon directly or by a third-party seller using Amazon's platform, as long as Amazon participated in the chain of distribution. FBA products almost always qualify.

What about products sold through Amazon but shipped by the seller?

Cases involving third-party sellers who use their own fulfillment are more contested. Bolger and Loomis involved FBA shipments. Some federal courts have declined to extend strict liability to non-FBA transactions, but California courts continue to focus on whether Amazon was integral to bringing the product to the consumer.

What is the deadline to sue for an Amazon product injury?

Two years from the date of injury, under California Code of Civil Procedure §335.1. Wrongful death claims have a separate two-year deadline from the date of death. Minor victims have additional tolling protections.

What damages are available against Amazon?

The same damages available in any California product liability case: medical bills, lost wages, future medical and economic losses, pain and suffering, scarring, and in some cases punitive damages under Civil Code §3294 if Amazon's conduct rose to malice or conscious disregard.

Does Amazon's user agreement prevent me from suing?

Amazon's Conditions of Use contain arbitration and limitation provisions, but California courts have generally permitted product liability claims to proceed despite those terms, particularly when the injured party did not personally purchase the item or did not knowingly agree to the terms.