EAST ST. LOUIS – Amazon protects Chinese suppliers from liability, according to lawyers for a widow who can’t enforce a judgment she secured in a wrongful death suit at U.S. district court.
Mark Schuver, William Niehoff, and Melissa Meirink blasted Amazon in a discovery brief on April 29.
They claimed a large number of products on Amazon’s website “are immune from product liability and personal injury claims because the sellers are based in China.”
The attorneys represent Sandra Scott of Nashville, who claims electric socks from China burned husband Floyd Scott so badly that his death resulted.
She sued sock maker Global Vasion and Amazon in December 2020.
Global Vasion and Amazon retained Louis Berra of the Lewis Rice firm in St. Louis, but he withdrew from Global Vasion’s defense in March 2021.
He claimed Global Vasion failed and would continue to fail to pay for the firm’s services, and he filed an attachment under seal.
District Judge David Dugan gave Global Vasion 21 days to replace Berra.
Global Vasion didn’t replace Berra or proceed in any fashion.
Scott’s team moved for default judgment and asked for a hearing on damages at the conclusion of the case.
Dugan granted their motion last August.
This February, they notified Berra that they would depose an Amazon representative about Chinese sellers.
They stated they would ask about the ability of customers to obtain compensation for injuries from Chinese sellers.
They stated they would ask about solicitation of sellers in China, revenue from them, and their percentage among sellers on Amazon’s U.S. website.
On April 15, Berra moved to protect Amazon from the questions.
He accused Schuver, Niehoff and Meirink of xenophobia.
In their opposition brief they claimed Berra failed to address the importance of the issues at stake.
They claimed that unlike many nations China hasn’t entered into an agreement with the U.S. regarding foreign judgments.
“Therefore, recognition and enforcement of a U.S. judgment in China is impossible,” they wrote.
They claimed Amazon represents to the public that it requires certain third parties to maintain liability insurance.
They claimed Amazon produced no evidence of any effort to ensure Global Vasion maintained coverage.
“On the one hand, Amazon actively solicits Chinese based sellers to sell their products on its U.S. website because they provide a source of cheap goods resulting in high profits,” they wrote.
“On the other hand, Amazon has long been aware that by soliciting an ever larger number of sellers based in China, it has intentionally immunized an ever larger number of its products from product liability and personal injury claims.”
They claimed this issue drove enactment of legislation in Europe and India, requiring disclosure of country of origin for all Amazon products.
They claimed Amazon has opposed disclosure legislation in the U.S.
They claimed Chinese sellers were believed to make up more than 63 percent of all third party sellers on Amazon.
Dugan has set trial next May.