Families across the country are suing the companies behind Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, Snapchat, and YouTube, alleging that the platforms were designed to be addictive to children and teens and caused eating disorders, depression, anxiety, and self-harm. A Los Angeles jury found Meta and YouTube liable in March 2026, and more trials are expected in 2027.
Doyle APC, based in San Diego, California, handles social media addiction cases for families in California and nationwide, together with experienced co-counsel. Inquiries are welcome from all 50 states.
Last updated: November 4, 2026.
At a glance
- Defendants
- Meta Platforms (Instagram, Facebook), ByteDance (TikTok), Snap Inc. (Snapchat), Google (YouTube)
- Main injuries
- Eating disorders, depression, anxiety, self-harm, suicidal ideation or attempts
- Courts
- MDL No. 3047, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers; JCCP No. 5255, Los Angeles Superior Court, Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl
- Cases pending
- 4,309 in the MDL as of November 2, 2026; about 3,300 in the Los Angeles proceeding
- Trials
- $6 million verdict against Meta and YouTube in K.G.M. (March 2026); second Los Angeles trial settled before openings (November 2026); next Los Angeles trials expected March 2027
- Settlement
- No global settlement of individual injury claims; Meta’s settlement with state attorneys general does not pay families
Who may have a claim
Every situation is different, and no single factor decides whether a claim can be pursued. The claims being brought commonly involve a young person who:
- Used Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, Snapchat, or YouTube heavily, often for hours a day
- Began that heavy use as a child or teenager
- Was diagnosed with a mental health condition linked to that use
- Received treatment, such as therapy, medication, hospitalization, or a residential or outpatient treatment program
Families who lost a young person may also have a claim. Heavy use alone, without a diagnosis and treatment, is generally not enough to pursue a claim.
Platforms involved
The lawsuits name Meta Platforms, which owns Instagram and Facebook; ByteDance and its TikTok subsidiaries; Snap Inc., which owns Snapchat; and Google and its YouTube subsidiary.
Features the lawsuits target
The lawsuits treat the platforms as products and focus on design features rather than on content posted by other users. The features at issue include algorithmic recommendation feeds, infinite scroll, autoplay, Snapchat streaks, likes and other social rewards, beauty filters, and notifications timed to pull users back to the app.
Showing platform use
Useful evidence of use includes screen time reports from a phone or tablet, account history, and the data each platform lets users download. School records from the period of decline can also help. If you are not sure what records exist or how to get them, contact us.
Injuries and conditions
- Eating disorders. Anorexia, bulimia, binge eating disorder, and related conditions, often linked in the lawsuits to appearance-focused feeds and filters.
- Depression and anxiety. Major depressive disorder, severe anxiety, and related diagnoses.
- Self-harm and suicide. Self-harm, suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and deaths.
- Body dysmorphia. Persistent distress over perceived flaws in appearance.
- Sleep and attention problems. Sleep deprivation and attention difficulties, often alongside the conditions above.
Warning signs include pulling away from family and friends, losing interest in activities, falling grades, changes in eating or weight, trouble sleeping, and distress when the phone is taken away. Treatment ranges from therapy and medication to hospitalization and residential programs.
If you or someone you know is struggling with thoughts of suicide or self-harm, the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline is available 24 hours a day. Call or text 988.
Why the platforms are alleged to cause harm
The lawsuits allege that the companies designed their platforms to maximize the time young users spend on them, knew from their own research that heavy use by minors was associated with anxiety, depression, body image harm, and compulsive use, and did not warn users or parents. The claims include defective design, failure to warn, and negligence.
Much of the case rests on the companies’ internal documents. Public attention grew in 2021, when former Facebook employee Frances Haugen disclosed internal research on Instagram’s effects on teenagers and testified before the U.S. Senate. Evidence presented at the K.G.M. trial in 2026 included a 2015 email from Mark Zuckerberg calling for a 12 percent increase in time spent on Meta’s platforms, testimony about YouTube’s goal of reaching one billion hours of viewing a day, and internal Meta messages comparing Instagram to a drug.
Meta’s own research on parental controls
The defendants often argue that a young person’s struggles came from something else, such as family problems, bullying, or an earlier mental health condition, or that parents should have limited use. An internal Meta study known as Project MYST, conducted with the University of Chicago and based on a survey of about 1,000 teenagers and their parents, bears on both points. It found that parental supervision, time limits, and household rules had little association with whether teens could control their social media use, and that teens who had faced more adverse life experiences were less able to regulate their use. Instagram head Adam Mosseri testified that the findings were never published and that no warnings to parents or teens resulted from them.
The claims focus on the platforms’ own design choices. That distinction has allowed design-based claims to proceed past the platforms’ Section 230 and First Amendment defenses, while courts have limited some claims tied to how the platforms publish others’ content.
Where the litigation stands
On October 6, 2022, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated federal cases before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. As of November 2, 2026, 4,309 of the 4,495 cases filed in MDL No. 3047 remained pending, including personal injury cases and cases brought by school districts and local governments. About 3,300 more cases are coordinated in Los Angeles Superior Court before Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl in JCCP No. 5255.
No defendant has announced a global settlement of individual injury claims. Several individual cases have settled before trial.
Trials and verdicts
- March 24, 2026: $375 million verdict in New Mexico. In New Mexico v. Meta Platforms, the state’s child safety case, a Santa Fe jury returned a $375 million verdict against Meta. On August 6, 2026, the court ordered Meta to fund a $567 million abatement program over five years. Meta has said it will appeal.
- March 25, 2026: $6 million verdict in Los Angeles. In K.G.M. v. Meta Platforms, the first personal injury trial, a jury found for a 20-year-old California woman who began using YouTube at 6 and Instagram at 9. It awarded $3 million in compensatory damages, apportioned 70 percent to Meta and 30 percent to YouTube, plus $3 million in punitive damages. Snap and TikTok settled before trial. The court denied new trial motions in June 2026, and Meta and YouTube have appealed.
- May 2026: first federal bellwether settles. The school district case brought by Breathitt County, Kentucky settled before trial for a reported total of about $27 million from Meta, Snap, TikTok, and YouTube.
- July 22, 2026: second Los Angeles bellwether ends before trial. In R.K.C., brought on behalf of a Florida teenager, YouTube, TikTok, and Snap settled, and the plaintiff dismissed his claims against Meta.
- August 26, 2026: attorneys general trial ends in settlement. A federal trial brought by state attorneys general against Meta ended when Meta agreed to the settlement described below.
- November 2, 2026: second Los Angeles trial ends before openings. In the consolidated cases of S.J., a 16-year-old from Illinois, and K.D.B., an 18-year-old from Mississippi, TikTok and YouTube settled before trial and Meta settled with both plaintiffs by October 30. Jury selection began October 28, and Snap settled on November 2, two days before opening statements. Terms were not disclosed.
- March 2027: next Los Angeles bellwether trials. Plaintiffs’ lawyers say the next Los Angeles trials are scheduled to begin in March 2027.
- 2027: federal school district bellwethers. Cases brought by Tucson Unified School District and the Charleston County School District are expected to be the next federal bellwether trials.
Recent developments
- November 2, 2026: Snap settled with S.J. and K.D.B., ending the second Los Angeles bellwether trial before opening statements. Meta had settled with both plaintiffs by October 30.
- September 25, 2026: TikTok agreed to pay at least $100 million and up to $300 million to settle Alabama’s lawsuit.
- August 26, 2026: Judge Gonzalez Rogers approved Meta’s settlement with 51 attorneys general.
- August 10, 2026: The Ninth Circuit dismissed Meta’s and TikTok’s Section 230 appeals as premature, allowing the cases to continue.
- August 6, 2026: A New Mexico court ordered Meta to fund a $567 million abatement program.
- August 3, 2026: TikTok settled three Los Angeles cases set for trial, including S.J. and K.D.B.
- July 2026: Meta and YouTube appealed the K.G.M. verdict.
- June 9, 2026: The Los Angeles court denied Meta’s and YouTube’s motions for a new trial in K.G.M.
Settlements and compensation
The attorneys general settlement has no claims process for families
On August 26, 2026, Meta agreed to a consent judgment with 51 attorneys general, from 47 states, the District of Columbia, and three territories, valued at up to $17.1 billion. At least $12.1 billion is guaranteed over ten years, and the rest depends on other large platforms reaching comparable settlements. The settlement is between Meta and state governments. It is not a class action, the payments go to the states, and there is no claim form for families. It preserves individual personal injury claims, including the cases pending in MDL 3047 and JCCP 5255.
Compensation in individual cases
No defendant has announced a settlement program for individual injury claims, and the terms of the individual settlements reached before trial have not been disclosed. The K.G.M. verdict is one data point: it shows how one jury valued one fully tried case, and it is on appeal.
Compensation in a social media injury case can include economic damages for past and future medical and mental health treatment, such as therapy, medication, hospitalization, and residential programs, and non-economic damages for pain, suffering, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life. Families may bring wrongful death claims, and some states allow punitive damages, as the K.G.M. jury awarded. The value of an individual claim depends on factors such as the diagnosis and its severity, the treatment required, whether there was a suicide attempt or hospitalization, the age when heavy use began, how well the records document use and treatment, any earlier mental health history, and the law of the state that applies.
Age and deadlines to file
Many claimants were minors when the harm began and are now in their late teens or early twenties. An adult claimant can pursue a claim without a parent’s involvement, and parents can bring claims on behalf of minor children.
Every claim is subject to a filing deadline, called the statute of limitations, set by state law. Many states pause or extend the deadline while the injured person is a minor, but the rules differ widely from state to state. The MDL does not create a nationwide deadline, so if you are unsure whether a deadline has passed, have your situation evaluated promptly rather than assuming.
How we handle these cases
Doyle APC handles social media addiction cases nationwide together with experienced co-counsel who are deeply involved in this litigation. Federal cases can be filed in the MDL from any state, and California cases are coordinated in Los Angeles.
The most important records are medical, psychiatric, or therapy records showing the diagnosis and treatment, along with any hospitalization or treatment program records, evidence of platform use, and school records where relevant. You do not need to gather any of this before reaching out. You pay nothing unless we recover.
If the harm involved video games rather than social media, a separate coordinated proceeding in Los Angeles addresses similar claims against video game companies. See video game addiction lawsuits.
Common questions
Can you sue for social media addiction?
Yes, in many cases. The lawsuits generally involve a young person who used social media heavily as a child or teenager and was later diagnosed and treated for a condition such as an eating disorder, depression, anxiety, or self-harm, and whose claim is within the statute of limitations. Heavy use alone, without a diagnosis and treatment, is generally not enough.
Can families outside California bring a claim?
Yes. Doyle APC handles social media addiction cases nationwide together with experienced co-counsel. Federal cases can be filed in the MDL from any state.
Has anyone won a social media addiction lawsuit?
Yes. In March 2026, a Los Angeles jury awarded $6 million, including $3 million in punitive damages, against Meta and YouTube in K.G.M. v. Meta Platforms. A day earlier, a New Mexico jury returned a $375 million verdict against Meta in the state’s own case. Both verdicts are being appealed. A verdict shows how one jury valued one case and does not set the value of other claims.
How much is a social media addiction lawsuit worth?
There is no published average. No defendant has announced a settlement program for individual injury claims, and the terms of individual settlements reached before trial have not been disclosed. Compensation in an individual case can include the cost of past and future mental health treatment and damages for pain, suffering, and emotional distress. Value depends on the diagnosis, the treatment required, and the facts of each case.
Can my family file for part of the $17 billion settlement?
No. That settlement is between Meta and the state attorneys general and has no claims process for individuals. It is not a class action, and it preserves individual injury claims, which are pursued separately.
We used parental controls and screen time limits. Does that hurt our case?
No. Meta’s own research found that parental supervision and time limits had little association with whether teens could control their use. A parent’s efforts to limit use are part of the history, and they are consistent with the claims.
My child had mental health struggles before using social media. Can we still have a claim?
Possibly. An earlier condition does not automatically rule out a claim. The lawsuits allege the platforms worsened existing conditions, and Meta’s research found that teens facing more difficult life circumstances were less able to control their use. The defendants focus closely on prior history, so it is an important part of every claim.
Can a young adult file a claim without a parent?
Yes. An adult claimant can pursue a claim on their own, even if the heavy use began as a child.
Sources
- Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation: transfer order creating MDL No. 3047 (October 6, 2022) and pending MDL dockets report (November 2, 2026)
- U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and Los Angeles Superior Court: orders in MDL No. 3047 and JCCP No. 5255
- State attorneys general: announcements of the Meta consent judgment (August 26, 2026) and the Alabama TikTok settlement (September 25, 2026)
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: opinion dismissing Section 230 appeals (August 10, 2026)