SC appeals court affirms dismissal in vaping battery injury case

Listen to this article

SUMMARY

• South Carolina Court of Appeals upheld dismissal of products liability case for lack of personal jurisdiction
• Case involved injury from size 18650 lithium-ion cell used in vaping device
• Court found no jurisdictional facts linking defendant company’s conduct to South Carolina
• Stream of commerce theory rejected; conclusory allegations deemed insufficient to establish jurisdiction

The South Carolina Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of a products liability case for lack of personal jurisdiction, finding that the plaintiff failed to allege facts sufficient to support a prima facie showing of specific jurisdiction.

The seven-page opinion is Fleming v. The Planet Vape LLC.

The plaintiff filed suit after being injured by a size 18650 lithium-ion cell used as a consumer vaping battery. He argued that the circuit court erred in dismissing his complaint, contending that the court wrongly focused on whether the defendant company directly served the consumer standalone battery market, and that evidence of the company’s broader market activities should have been enough.

The appellate court disagreed. It emphasized that even assuming the truth of the plaintiff’s allegations, the complaint did not allege jurisdictional facts linking the defendant’s conduct to South Carolina. The plaintiff failed to plead facts showing that the company designed, manufactured, distributed, advertised, or sold the batteries as standalone consumer products in the state.

The court further noted that factual disputes should ordinarily be resolved in favor of the non-moving party, but here “none of the facts” supported jurisdiction. The record contained no evidence that the defendant shipped 18650 cells to South Carolina or targeted the state’s vaping market. The court rejected reliance on the stream of commerce theory and found the plaintiff did not satisfy the fairness prong of due process analysis.

Concluding that the plaintiff had pleaded only conclusory assertions without factual support, the court affirmed the circuit court’s order dismissing the case.

EXTERNAL LINKS

• South Carolina Judicial Branch Opinions
• Product liability law overview – Cornell Law School