LG Chem Loses Bid to Exit Georgia Vaper’s Battery Burn Lawsuit

South Korea-based LG Chem Ltd. must face a Georgia vaper’s claims that an e-cigarette battery exploded as he was putting it into his pants pocket, after the Georgia Supreme Court on Tuesday denied the company’s request that it take the case.

LG Chem had sought review of an intermediate appeals court opinion holding that its marketing of lithium-ion batteries and other contacts with Georgia subject it to suit over an injury in the state.

LG Chem has fought jurisdiction across the U.S. in numerous suits alleging its batteries caused burn injuries to e-cigarette users. Georgia is a special case because LG Chem’s U.S. subsidiary is headquartered there, but the intermediate court focused on LG Chem’s own activities.

The top court’s action means other vapers in the state who allege injuries from LG Chem’s batteries can point to the same company contacts with Georgia to keep it as a defendant in their lawsuits, according to Harris Yegelwel, a lawyer for the injured man, Cameron Lemmerman. “I’ll be able to introduce it and wave it around,” he said.

In Lemmerman’s case and two companion suits, attorneys will be able to conduct discovery and “try to expose that these aren’t isolated incidents,” said Yegelwel, who’s with Morgan & Morgan in Orlando, Fla.

LG Chem America Inc. and LG Electronics USA didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

A trial court in Tennessee recently concluded that LG Chem and its U.S. affiliate are subject to personal jurisdiction there in a case with similar battery allegations.

Lemmerman alleges that his girlfriend bought an LG Chem 18650 battery at a Georgia vape shop, used it regularly, and eventually gave it to him, according to the appeals court.

Later, the battery allegedly exploded as he was putting it into his pants pocket. He sustained permanent injury and disfigurement to his legs, scrotum, and hand, he says.

LG Chem sought to dismiss the case on jurisdiction grounds, arguing that it hadn’t authorized the sale of single 18650 batteries to consumers and hadn’t intended them for use in electronic cigarettes.

The lower court declined to dismiss the suit, and the appellate panel affirmed. Lemmerman’s claims are related closely enough to LG Chem’s activities in the state to support specific personal jurisdiction under the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court, that court said.

Yegelwel said the state top court’s denial of review effectively affirms the Georgia Court of Appeals opinion, which shows “exactly what a manufacturer needs to do in a post-Ford world.” The action may be “helpful for other courts,” he said.

The denial was unanimous, except for one justice who was disqualified.

Brannock Humphries & Berman also represented Lemmerman. Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP represented LG Chem.

The case is LG Chem, Ltd. v. Lemmerman, Ga., No. S22C0204, certiorari denied 3/8/22.