Case Name: Billy Wayne FRITH and Wanda Frith as Parents and Natural Guardians of Joshua Brent Frith, a Minor, Appellants, v. BIC CORPORATION, Appellee
Court: Mississippi Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Mississippi
Decision Date: 2002-12-03
Citations: 852 So. 2d 592
Docket Number: No. 2000-CA-01124-COA
Parties: Billy Wayne FRITH and Wanda Frith as Parents and Natural Guardians of Joshua Brent Frith, a Minor, Appellants, v. BIC CORPORATION, Appellee.
Judges: BRIDGES, THOMAS, LEE, CHANDLER AND BRANTLEY, JJ., CONCUR. SOUTHWICK, P.J., DISSENTS WITH SEPARATE WRITTEN OPINION JOINED BY MCMILLIN, C.J. KING, P.J., DISSENTS WITHOUT WRITTEN OPINION. IRVING, J., NOT PARTICIPATING.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 852
Pages: 592–595

Head Matter:
Billy Wayne FRITH and Wanda Frith as Parents and Natural Guardians of Joshua Brent Frith, a Minor, Appellants, v. BIC CORPORATION, Appellee.
No. 2000-CA-01124-COA.
Court of Appeals of Mississippi.
Dec. 3, 2002.
Rehearing Denied Feb. 18, 2003.
Dana J. Swan, Clarksdale, attorney for appellants.
James D. Holland, Ridgeland, D. Collier Graham Jr., Jackson, attorneys for appel-lee.

Opinion:
MODIFIED OPINION ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
MYERS, J.,
for the court.
¶ 1. The Appellants' motion for rehearing is granted. The original opinion issued by this Court is withdrawn and this opinion is substituted therefor.
¶ 2. Ten year old Joshua Frith was severely burned when he found a disposable cigarette lighter manufactured by BIC Corporation in his back yard and attempted to ignite it while standing near a gasoline can. Joshua's parents, Billy Wayne and Wanda Frith, filed suit in the Circuit Court of Scott County against BIC Corporation on Joshua's behalf asserting a products liability claim. BIC Corporation moved for summary judgment asserting that the Friths's state law claims were preempted by federal law. The trial court granted BIC Corporation's motions for summary judgment finding that the Friths's state law claims were preempted by federal law. Aggrieved by this decision, the Friths appealed asserting that their claims were not preempted by federal law.
LEGAL ANALYSIS WHETHER THE FRITHS'S STATE LAW CLAIMS ARE PREEMPTED BY FEDERAL LAW.
¶ 8. The sole issue raised by the Friths in this appeal is whether their claims based on state common law are preempted by federal law. Preemption can occur in one of three ways: "(1) where Congress explicitly preempts state law, (2) where preemption is implied because Congress has occupied the entire field, or (3) where preemption is implied because there is an actual conflict between federal and state law." Cooper v. General Motors Corp., 702 So.2d 428, 434(¶ 16) (Miss.1997). The federal standard is a minimum standard and any state may establish or continue a safety requirement so long as that safety requirement provides a higher degree of protection than the federal standard. 15 U.S.C.A. § 2075(b).
¶ 4. Congress did not explicitly preempt state law or occupy the entire field on lighter safety regulations. The only possibility that remains is whether this area of law is impliedly preempted due to a conflict of state and federal law. The applicable federal safety standard is that lighter companies are to implement safety devices on the lighters so that they cannot be successfully used by children five years of age. 16 C.F.R. § 1210.1. The standard proposed by the Friths is a higher standard than that established by federal law. Based on the dictates of 15 U.S.C.A. § 2075(b), state and federal law would not conflict as the state law would provide more protection to the product consumer. The trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of BIC Corporation finding that federal law preempted state law is reversed and remanded for new trial.
¶ 5. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF SCOTT COUNTY IS REVERSED AND REMANDED. ALL COSTS OF APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO THE APPELLEE.
BRIDGES, THOMAS, LEE, CHANDLER AND BRANTLEY, JJ., CONCUR. SOUTHWICK, P.J., DISSENTS WITH SEPARATE WRITTEN OPINION JOINED BY MCMILLIN, C.J. KING, P.J., DISSENTS WITHOUT WRITTEN OPINION. IRVING, J., NOT PARTICIPATING.