Morgan & Morgan Social Media Lawsuit: Verdict and Upcoming Trials

Morgan & Morgan is one of the lead plaintiffs’ firms in the nationwide social media addiction lawsuits against Meta, Google (YouTube), ByteDance (TikTok), and Snap, representing hundreds of families whose children allege serious mental health harm from platform design. The firm’s attorneys hold a co-lead counsel role in the California coordinated proceedings and served as trial counsel in the first bellwether case to reach a jury, which returned a $6 million verdict against Meta and YouTube in March 2026.¹

The Firm’s Role in the Litigation

Morgan & Morgan represents individual clients, primarily minors and their parents, who allege that compulsive social media use caused depression, anxiety, eating disorders, self-harm, suicidal ideation, or in some cases death. The firm has publicly said it represents hundreds of such clients, and other firm materials put the caseload above 1,000.²¹

Attorney Emily Jeffcott has been designated co-lead counsel for the plaintiffs’ side of the social media cases.² Jeffcott and fellow Morgan & Morgan attorney Josh Autry tried the first bellwether case and are designated to serve as trial counsel in additional bellwether trials.¹

The First Bellwether Verdict: K.G.M. v. Meta & YouTube

The first case in the litigation to reach a jury was K.G.M. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. & YouTube LLC, tried in Los Angeles Superior Court. The plaintiff, a 20-year-old woman from Chico, California, alleged that she began using social media as a child and developed severe depression and anxiety driven by features like infinite scroll and algorithmic recommendations.³

TikTok and Snapchat, originally named as defendants, reached confidential settlements with the plaintiff shortly before trial, leaving Meta and YouTube as the remaining defendants.⁴ The terms of those settlements have not been publicly disclosed.⁵

Jury selection began January 27, 2026, and the trial started February 10. On March 25, 2026, the jury found both Meta and YouTube liable for negligent product design, concluding that their platforms were defective products engineered to be addictive and to exploit children.⁶ The jury awarded $6 million in total damages, split evenly between $3 million in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages. Meta was assigned 70 percent of the liability ($4.2 million) and YouTube 30 percent ($1.8 million).³

On June 10, 2026, the court denied post-trial motions by Meta and YouTube to overturn the verdict, rejecting arguments based on Section 230, the First Amendment, and causation.⁷ Both companies have said they intend to appeal.⁶

What the Lawsuits Allege

These cases treat social media platforms as defective products rather than neutral communication tools. Plaintiffs argue that Meta, Google, ByteDance, and Snap engineered specific features to maximize time spent by young users: infinite scrolling, autoplay video, algorithmic recommendations, push notifications, “like” counters, disappearing content, and streak mechanics.⁸ The lawsuits contend those features exploit developmental vulnerabilities in adolescent brains and produce compulsive use that amounts to addiction.

The claims sound in negligent and defective product design, failure to warn users and parents about known mental health risks, and corporate misconduct — the allegation that executives knew their platforms were harming kids but chose growth and ad revenue over safety. Plaintiffs have cited internal company documents and whistleblower disclosures, including one internal Meta document that reportedly described the company’s own product as a “drug” and its management as “pushers.”⁹

Alleged harms include depression, anxiety, anorexia and bulimia, sleep disorders, self-harm, suicidal ideation, social withdrawal, academic disruption, and wrongful death.⁸

Where the Cases Are Being Heard

The litigation runs on two coordinated tracks. In Los Angeles Superior Court, Judge Carolyn Kuhl oversees JCCP 5255, a state coordinated proceeding that consolidates cases from more than 350 families and 250 school districts against Meta, Google, ByteDance, and Snap.¹⁰ In June 2024, Judge Kuhl ruled that individual personal injury claims could proceed and rejected defense motions for summary judgment based on Section 230 and the First Amendment, finding that claims targeting platform design could go to a jury.¹¹ She dismissed the school district claims in the state proceeding.¹²

In the Northern District of California, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers presides over MDL No. 3047, established in October 2022, which consolidates individual, school district, and state attorney general suits. In October 2024, Judge Gonzalez Rogers held that Section 230 and the First Amendment do not bar negligence claims and allowed school district negligence and public nuisance claims and most state attorney general claims to proceed.¹³

Upcoming Trials the Firm Is Handling

Jeffcott and Autry are set to serve as trial counsel in the next personal injury bellwether case in the California state proceedings, R.K.C. v. Meta Platforms, Inc., scheduled for summer 2026.¹¹⁰¹⁴¹⁵

Who May Qualify and How to Join

Morgan & Morgan takes social media harm cases on a contingency-fee basis, meaning clients pay nothing unless the firm recovers damages. Intake starts with a free screening that looks at platform usage, the user’s age, and the impact on mental health.⁸

The firm generally looks for cases where a child or teenager used social media regularly over time, developed new or worsening mental health symptoms, received a professional diagnosis such as depression, anxiety, or an eating disorder, and experienced lasting effects on health, wellbeing, or school performance. Social media does not need to be the sole cause of the harm, only a substantial contributing factor. Parents or legal guardians can file on behalf of minors.⁸

Preserving Evidence If You’re Already a Client

Clients already in the litigation are required to complete a client questionnaire, a plaintiff fact sheet, and a user account preservation form. The firm has stressed the importance of preserving all relevant evidence: social media accounts, messages, texts, photos, health records, and physical devices. Snap Inc. has reportedly begun freezing accounts of plaintiffs in the lawsuit to preserve evidence on its end.¹²

1
Morgan & Morgan. Meta and YouTube Found Negligent and Have Acted Punitive Conduct Social Media Harm Trial
2
Morgan & Morgan. Morgan & Morgan’s Emily Jeffcott Co-Lead Social Media Case Counsel
3
The New York Times. Social Media Trial Verdict
4
BBC News. Social Media Addiction Trial
5
Sokolove Law. Social Media Addiction Settlements and Verdicts
6
NPR. Meta YouTube Social Media Trial Verdict
7
The Lanier Law Firm. Social Media Addiction Lawsuit
8
Morgan & Morgan. Social Media Harm
9
CalMatters. Social Media Addiction Suits in California
10
Tech Oversight Project. Landmark 2026 Social Media Cases Fact Sheet
11
Courthouse News Service. Social Media Companies Face LA Trial Over Role in Youth Mental Health Crisis
12
Morgan & Morgan. Social Media Lawsuit: What’s Happening Now and What Clients Need to Know
13
Tech Policy Press. Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation
14
MDL Centrality. Social Media MDL Index
15
U.S. District Court, N.D. Cal. Re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products