## Facts

- Amazon operates an online marketplace that includes goods sold by Amazon and goods sold by third-party merchants.
- For third-party marketplace transactions, Amazon provides the website listing and checkout process, often processes payments (taking fees), and may provide logistics through its “Fulfillment by Amazon” (FBA) program.
- Under FBA, third-party merchants store inventory in Amazon facilities; Amazon packages and ships products, but the merchant retains title until the sale to the consumer.
- A remote control was purchased on Amazon from a third-party seller (Hu Xi Jie) using FBA; Amazon shipped the remote to the buyer.
- A 19-month-old child accessed the remote, swallowed a button battery, and suffered severe internal injuries.
- The plaintiff sued Amazon and the third-party seller for strict products liability based on alleged design and marketing defects under Chapter 82 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
- The third-party seller did not appear; Amazon argued it could not be strictly liable because it was not a statutory “seller” since it never held or transferred title.

## Issues

1. Whether, under Chapter 82, an online marketplace provider that does not hold or transfer title to third-party goods is a “seller” when it controls the transaction process and delivery.

## Decision

- The Texas Supreme Court answered the certified question “no.”
- It held that, in an ordinary sale, Chapter 82 “seller” liability is limited to entities that relinquished title at some point in the distribution chain.
- Because Amazon did not hold or relinquish title to the remote sold by the third-party merchant, Amazon was not a Chapter 82 “seller,” even if it controlled payment processing and delivery logistics.
- A dissent would have treated Amazon as a “seller” based on its functional role in distributing and placing the product into the stream of commerce.

## Legal Principles

- Chapter 82’s definition of “seller” is construed consistently with Texas common-law strict products liability and Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A; it does not expand strict-liability categories beyond the traditional distribution chain.
- In an ordinary sale, a “seller” for Chapter 82 strict-liability purposes must have held and relinquished title to the product at some point before it reached the consumer.
- Operational control over listing, payment processing, warehousing, and shipping, without title transfer, is insufficient to make an online marketplace provider a statutory “seller.”
- Expanding strict products liability to cover e-commerce platforms that facilitate third-party sales is a policy choice for the Legislature, not judicial redefinition of “seller.”

## Conclusion

The court held that an online marketplace provider is not strictly liable under Chapter 82 as a “seller” for a third-party product when the provider never held or transferred title, even if it substantially controlled the transaction and delivery.


Amazon.com, Inc. v. McMillan, 625 S.W.3d 101 (Tex. 2021)