11
He Lit a Tabletop Firepit. It Exploded in His Face. Now He’s Suing Amazon.
San Diego Man Sues Amazon After Tabletop Firepit Explodes in His Face
What Happened: The Scary Incident
Anthony Trevino, a 31-year-old former search and rescue swimmer from San Diego, is suing Amazon after a terrifying accident in his own home. Here’s the simple breakdown:
- The product: A Colsen "Tabletop Rubbing Alcohol Outdoor Fire Pit" — basically a small decorative bowl you put on a table and burn rubbing alcohol in for ambiance
- The date: September 17, 2025
- What went wrong: Anthony thought the flame had gone out, so he tried to add more fuel. But invisible flames were still burning — when he poured in more alcohol, it created a massive fireball explosion (called "flame jetting")
- The injuries: Third-degree burns across his face and body, hospitalized for weeks
- The damage: The explosion was so powerful it melted his artificial turf and balcony lights
Important Point: Anthony’s job used to be saving people from danger. Now he’s fighting to hold a giant company accountable for putting danger in his living room.
Why Is He Suing Amazon? (They Didn’t Even Make It!)
This is the big legal question. Amazon didn’t manufacture the firepit — a company called Colsen did. But Anthony’s lawyers argue Amazon should still be responsible. Here’s why:
Amazon’s Role Was Bigger Than Just "Listing" the Product
| What Amazon Did | Why It Matters |
|---|---|
| Stocked the "shelf" (their website) | They chose to offer this product to millions |
| Took a cut of every sale | They profited directly from each purchase |
| Recommended which fuel to buy | They guided customers to the exact rubbing alcohol to use |
| Handled the recall notification | They were legally required to warn buyers — but the warning was weak |
Key Legal Concept: In 2020, a California court ruled in Bolger v. Amazon that Amazon CAN be held liable for defective products sold by third-party sellers on its platform. The court said: if you act like a retailer (stock, sell, profit, ship), you’re responsible like a retailer.
The Recall That Wasn’t Loud Enough
The Colsen firepit was officially recalled in 2024 by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) because of exactly this danger — flame jetting.
What Amazon did: Sent a notice to customers saying the product "may not meet current mandatory or voluntary safety standards"
What the lawsuit says: That warning was too vague. It didn’t say: "This product can explode in your face and cause life-altering burns."
Callout: Other countries took this danger much more seriously:
- Western Australia effectively banned these in 2017
- Canada banned certain models in 2019
- The U.S. only recalled this specific model in 2024
What Is "Flame Jetting"? (ELI5 Explanation)
Imagine this:
- You have a candle burning
- You blow it out — but a tiny, invisible ember is still hot
- You pour gasoline near it
- WHOOSH — the gas vapor travels back to the ember and ignites instantly, shooting a fireball at you
That’s flame jetting. With these firepits:
- Rubbing alcohol burns with a nearly invisible flame in daylight
- You think it’s out
- You pour more fuel
- The invisible flame follows the pouring stream back into the bottle → EXPLOSION
Why This Case Matters for Everyone
Amazon processes over 15 million orders every single day. Most come from third-party sellers — not Amazon itself.
If courts keep ruling that Amazon is responsible for what it sells:
- Safer products (Amazon will vet sellers more carefully)
- Better warnings (clear, loud, impossible to miss)
- Faster recalls (when danger is found, you’ll actually know)
- Higher prices? (maybe — but is safety worth a few extra dollars?)
This case is being watched closely. A similar lawsuit is already moving through federal court in Florida involving a child burned by a tabletop firepit.
Summary
- Anthony Trevino, a former rescue swimmer, was severely burned when a tabletop firepit exploded due to flame jetting — an invisible flame that follows poured fuel back into the container
- The Colsen firepit had been recalled in 2024, but Amazon’s warning to customers was vague and didn’t explain the true danger
- Anthony is suing Amazon, not the manufacturer, because Amazon acted like a retailer: stocked it, profited from it, recommended the fuel, and controlled the recall notice
- A 2020 California ruling (Bolger v. Amazon) already said Amazon can be liable for third-party products — this case tests how far that responsibility goes
- Other countries banned these products years ago; the U.S. is catching up
- The outcome could change how 15+ million daily Amazon orders are vetted for safety
FAQ: Your Questions Answered
Did Amazon make the firepit?
No. A company called Colsen manufactured it. Amazon was the marketplace where it was sold.
If Amazon didn’t make it, why are they being sued?
Because they acted like a store: they chose to sell it, took a percentage of every sale, told buyers which fuel to use, and were legally required to handle the recall notice. California law says if you act like a retailer, you’re responsible like one.
What is "flame jetting" in simple terms?
When you pour flammable liquid (like rubbing alcohol) toward a flame you can’t see, the fire travels up the stream of liquid into the bottle or at your face — like a fireball. It happens fast and without warning.
Has this happened to other people?
Yes. The CPSC reported two deaths and dozens of serious burn injuries from similar alcohol-burning firepits. That’s why the Colsen model was recalled.
What could happen if Anthony wins?
Amazon might have to:
- Pay for his medical bills, pain, and life changes
- Change how it monitors third-party products
- Issue much clearer, louder warnings for recalled items
- Set a precedent making marketplaces nationwide more accountable
Final Thought: Anthony put it best: "My whole life, my job was to pull people out of danger. I can’t undo what happened to me, but I can hold Amazon accountable to ensure they stop selling products that are so dangerous they can alter the course of someone’s life."
