Texas Court to Hear LG Battery Explosion Injury Case

Feb.28.2023
Texas Court to Hear LG Battery Explosion Injury Case
LG Chemical faces US court jurisdiction dispute over exploding e-cigarette battery case in Texas court.

According to a Law360 report, the Supreme Court of Texas (referred to as "Texas" below) has agreed to hear a case against LG Chem and LG Chem America. The case involves an e-cigarette user who was injured due to an LG battery explosion. It will decide whether Texas courts have jurisdiction over LG Chem. LG Chem is headquartered in South Korea, with LG Chem America being its subsidiary.


The focus of this case is that the jurisdiction of the United States states is under the framework of federal law. States cannot exercise jurisdiction over judicial matters that do not belong to their state. LG Chemical's batteries are not directly distributed nationwide, so areas without direct distribution cannot exercise jurisdiction.


In 2016, Texan resident Tommy Morgan purchased an electronic cigarette which utilized an LG Chemical-manufactured 18650 lithium-ion battery. According to a lawsuit he filed in 2019 in Brazoria County Court, he claims that the battery in the e-cigarette exploded and caught fire unexpectedly, resulting in permanent injuries.


The company is also facing similar battery explosion lawsuits from Texas residents. However, the intermediate appeals court has come to a different conclusion regarding whether LG Chemical has sufficient contacts in the state to respond to the claims of victims, specifically regarding direct benefit from e-cigarette sales.


LG Chem USA and LG Chem assert that the Texas court lacks jurisdiction because these companies have not sold any individual batteries in Texas or sold directly to customers in the state.


LG Chem | Image Source: LG Chem Official Website.


It is understood that this is not the first time that LG Chemical has faced a similar lawsuit.


In Mississippi, the Dilworth couple has claimed that an electronic cigarette battery exploded while walking their dog, causing Mrs. Dilworth to suffer second and third degree burns. The battery was purchased separately from a local Mississippi e-cigarette store without any warnings or instructions.


The Dilworths have initiated a lawsuit including LG Chem, but it has encountered issues related to jurisdiction. LG Chem argued that Mississippi does not have personal jurisdiction over the company (see related article at the end), as it does not sell batteries for electronic cigarettes in Mississippi. The district court rejected the lawsuit filed by the Dilworths.


The Dilworth couple kept appealing and finally, on October 13th, 2022, the Mississippi Supreme Court ruled that they can sue LG Chem in Mississippi.


In Ohio, Paul Straight purchased an e-cigarette from a vape store which exploded, burning through his jeans and left thigh. He subsequently sued LG Chem. However, the Ohio court ruled in favor of LG, dismissing the case.


The state judge believed that LG Chem had confirmed that they had not received any revenue from the sale or distribution of 18650 batteries in Ohio, nor had they advertised or solicited business for these batteries in Ohio.


According to anonymous sources cited by 2FIRSTS, LG and Samsung have both been insisting that their batteries cannot be used in e-cigarette products. Additionally, LG's 18650 batteries are encased in steel and therefore intrinsically risky.


In fact, LG's significant market share in the e-cigarette battery market has given them extensive experience in dealing with lawsuits. According to Market.us' 2022 global e-cigarette lithium battery market segmentation percentage list, Korean company LG ranks fourth globally, with the top three being Samsung of Korea, Sony of Japan, and Matsushita.


According to a report from the legal news website Legal Newsline, LG Chem is currently facing at least 44 similar lawsuits across the United States as of October 2022. Despite this, LG Chem has maintained the same defense in each of these cases, arguing that their 18650 batteries were never intended for use in e-cigarettes or other inhalation devices.


Consumers, however, clearly do not agree with this argument. Morgan, who filed a lawsuit in the Texas High Court, stated that "LG Chemical deliberately shipped products to customers in Texas (which caused consumer burns), therefore Texas courts have jurisdiction.


Related reading:


LG Electronics has been acquitted after being accused in a case of battery explosion.


A South Korean electronic cigarette battery manufacturer has been sued in Mississippi, USA.


A court in Texas will hear a case concerning exploding batteries.


Further Reading:


Personal Jurisdiction refers to the interpretation of the law in the United States.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

As Regulators Focus on Nicotine Pouch Child Safety, Safeguard Pursues an External Packaging Route
As Regulators Focus on Nicotine Pouch Child Safety, Safeguard Pursues an External Packaging Route
As regulators pay closer attention to child safety in nicotine pouches, manufacturers face a practical challenge: how to strengthen child-resistant packaging without unnecessarily reworking products, production lines and regulatory submissions already in place. In a written interview with 2Firsts, Chemular detailed Safeguard’s external packaging approach, its customer-specific testing requirements and possible PMTA pathways. The model remains early-stage, but it offers a new way to think about an increasingly important regulatory and manufacturing issue.
Industry Insight
Sep.19
Scottish Vape Display Rules Could Cost Businesses £61 Million, Affecting More Than 11,000 Retail Outlets
Scottish Vape Display Rules Could Cost Businesses £61 Million, Affecting More Than 11,000 Retail Outlets
A Scottish government impact assessment estimates that proposed vape display and packaging rules could create up to £61 million ($82 million) in compliance costs for businesses, affecting more than 11,000 retail outlets. The estimated costs are mainly linked to inventory adjustments, retail storage changes and the resources required for businesses to understand and implement the new requirements. The measures form part of the UK’s broader efforts to tighten vape regulation, particularly around product displays, packaging and sales practices.
Aug.10
China Tobacco Zhejiang files patent for pressure-triggered, on-demand oral nicotine release
China Tobacco Zhejiang files patent for pressure-triggered, on-demand oral nicotine release
China Tobacco Zhejiang Industrial Co., Ltd. has filed a patent application for an oral nicotine delivery product designed to let users actively adjust nicotine release. The product embeds two types of nicotine reservoirs with different wall thicknesses and positions inside a deformable matrix. Pressure applied with the tongue or lips can rupture the reservoirs and accelerate nicotine release. In simulated oral tests, several patent examples showed sharply higher peak nicotine release rates as applied force increased from 0 N to 1 N and 3 N. The filing explores a shift from preset release profiles toward user-triggered nicotine delivery.
Sep.01
U.S. Customs Plan to Require Foreign Export Declarations Could Deal ‘Devastating’ Blow to China’s Vape Exports, Logistics gl Expert Says
U.S. Customs Plan to Require Foreign Export Declarations Could Deal ‘Devastating’ Blow to China’s Vape Exports, Logistics gl Expert Says
A U.S. Customs and Border Protection proposal to collect foreign export declarations and other overseas customs documents could expose discrepancies in the value, classification and description of China-made vape shipments entering the United States. A veteran Chinese logistics professional told 2Firsts that the measure, if implemented, could undermine the all-inclusive shipping model used by some unauthorized vape exporters and push parts of the trade toward costlier underground channels. The risk extends beyond higher duties: accurately declared products may also be more readily identified as unauthorized e-cigarettes subject to FDA enforcement.
Special Report
Sep.07
Philippines Weighs Unified Vape Tax as Lawmakers Back Risk-Based Rates and Government Seeks to Fill ₱66 Billion Revenue Gap
Philippines Weighs Unified Vape Tax as Lawmakers Back Risk-Based Rates and Government Seeks to Fill ₱66 Billion Revenue Gap
Philippine lawmakers are considering an overhaul of the country's vape excise-tax regime to eliminate the wide gap between taxes on nicotine salt and freebase nicotine liquids and reduce incentives for misdeclaration. House Bill 5364, filed by Rep. Rufus Rodriguez and Rep. Maximo Rodriguez Jr., would impose a unified ₱10-per-milliliter tax on vapor products, with 5% annual increases beginning in 2027. Rodriguez says the proposal could generate an average ₱6 billion in annual collections from 2027 through 2030. The debate comes as the Philippine government considers tobacco, vape and other health-tax reforms to help offset around ₱66 billion in revenue expected to be forgone under a proposed tax-relief package.
Aug.18
China Tobacco Supply-Chain Leader Huabao’s Three-Way Transformation Takes Hold as Overseas Revenue Jumps 216%, Non-Flavor Businesses Reach 42.2% and the Company Expands Into Global Next-Generation Tobacco Supply Chains
China Tobacco Supply-Chain Leader Huabao’s Three-Way Transformation Takes Hold as Overseas Revenue Jumps 216%, Non-Flavor Businesses Reach 42.2% and the Company Expands Into Global Next-Generation Tobacco Supply Chains
Huabao’s H1 2026 results show the company advancing across three connected fronts: international expansion, entry into next-generation tobacco supply chains and diversification beyond its traditional tobacco-related base. Overseas revenue rose 216.08% to CNY 96.02 million, while non-flavor businesses reached 42.2% of total revenue. Huabao also said it had entered the supply chains of leading global tobacco customers, as its nutrition, food ingredient, fragrance and personal-care businesses gained ground in Europe, Southeast Asia, Australia and New Zealand. However, adjusted net profit increased only 2.78%, and next-generation tobacco revenue was not separately disclosed, showing that the transformation is reshaping revenue and customer exposure but has yet to translate fully into underlying earnings.
Aug.28