Caffeine bought online killed teen. But is Amazon at fault?

FILE-This Jan. 16, 2014 file photo shows Keystone High School Logan Stiner during a wrestling match in Sheffield Village, Ohio. The coroner said Stiner, who died May 27, 2014, had more than 70 micrograms of caffeine per milliliter of blood in his system.  The Ohio Supreme Court plans Wednesday, April 29, 2020 to hear arguments for and against a lawsuit brought by Stiner's family arguing that Amazon, the online retail giant, as the company that shipped the product, should be held responsible under Ohio product liability law.  (AP Photo/Steve Manheim, The Chronicle Telegram, File)
FILE-This Jan. 16, 2014 file photo shows Keystone High School Logan Stiner during a wrestling match in Sheffield Village, Ohio. The coroner said Stiner, who died May 27, 2014, had more than 70 micrograms of caffeine per milliliter of blood in his system. The Ohio Supreme Court plans Wednesday, April 29, 2020 to hear arguments for and against a lawsuit brought by Stiner's family arguing that Amazon, the online retail giant, as the company that shipped the product, should be held responsible under Ohio product liability law. (AP Photo/Steve Manheim, The Chronicle Telegram, File)

COLUMBUS, Ohio – Logan Stiner was just days from high school graduation when his brother found him unresponsive in their family’s home southwest of Cleveland in May 2014.

Stiner, 18, died of cardiac arrhythmia and seizure from acute caffeine toxicity, a coroner ruled. He had more than 70 micrograms of caffeine per milliliter of blood in his system —as much as 23 times the amount found in the system of a typical coffee or soda drinker.

What's undisputed is that Stiner ingested powdered caffeine given to him by a friend who bought it on Amazon and was using it as a “pre-workout” boost.

The question is what, if any, liability Amazon had in Stiner's death.

The Ohio Supreme Court plans Wednesday to hear arguments for and against a lawsuit brought by Stiner's family arguing that the online retail giant, as the company that shipped the product, should be held responsible under Ohio product liability law. A decision isn't expected for several weeks.

Attorneys for Stiner's father say the company was not a “neutral platform” in the powder's sale but promoted it, introduced it to Stiner's friend as a customer and played an “indispensable role" in its sale.

“The idea that Amazon cannot be a ‘supplier’ because it did not physically touch or take title to the product at issue ignores both the manner in which e-commerce is conducted today and Amazon's crucial role in recommending the deadly powder,” Brian Balser, a lawyer for Dennis Stiner, said in written arguments last year.

Lawyers for Amazon say the company doesn't meet the definition of a supplier under Ohio law — ownership, control and hands-on actions with a product. They note that Stiner's friend has testified she chose to click on the product she then bought.