Meta appeals verdict that found platforms harmed young user

• Meta filed a notice of appeal Tuesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court, challenging the March jury verdict that found negligence in platform design harmed a young user.
• The jury awarded $3 million in damages and recommended $3 million in punitive damages to the plaintiff, identified as Kaley, now 20.
• Google-owned YouTube, also found liable, said it plans to appeal; trial judge Carolyn B. Kuhl denied post-trial motions in June seeking to overturn the verdict.
• The verdict is expected to influence the outcome of thousands of similar lawsuits accusing social media companies of deliberately harming children.
• Meta separately faces a $375 million penalty from a New Mexico jury that found its platforms harm children’s mental health.

Trial judge upheld verdict in June

Meta’s lawyers filed the notice of appeal Tuesday, though the company has not yet submitted its full legal arguments. The verdict, which MSI previously reported on, found that negligence by both Meta and Google-owned YouTube was a substantial factor in causing harm to Kaley.

The five-week trial in Los Angeles centered on a woman identified in court only by her initials, KGM, and her first name, Kaley, who said she became addicted to social media as a child and that it worsened her mental health struggles. The jury awarded her $3 million in damages and recommended $3 million in punitive damages.

Mark Lanier, Kaley’s lead attorney, said in a statement that the legal team expects the appellate court to “continue the careful application of the law to this case, affirming the verdict of the trial court.”

A Meta spokesperson repeated the company’s previous statement that teen mental health is “profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app.” The spokesperson said the company “will continue to defend ourselves vigorously, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online.”

José Castañeda, a spokesperson for Google, said in a statement that YouTube plans to appeal and that “these are standard motions for this case to move forward.”

The trial judge, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl, denied post-trial motions from Meta and YouTube in early June. The motions — for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial — are routinely filed by defense lawyers after an adverse jury decision.

Tech companies like Meta and YouTube are generally shielded from legal responsibility for content posted by third parties under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act. To sidestep those protections, the plaintiffs focused on the design features of the platforms — “infinite scroll,” the endless nature of feeds, and autoplay functions. Throughout the trial, defendants raised frequent objections that the plaintiffs’ arguments encroached into content-related territory.

The verdict arrived during a broader wave of legal challenges to social media companies. A jury in New Mexico returned a verdict finding that Meta’s platforms harm children’s mental health and safety just one day before the California jury reached its decision. The New Mexico jury, siding with state prosecutors, imposed a $375 million penalty. Meta has said it disagrees with that verdict and will also appeal.

Kaley’s case was the first of its kind to reach trial. TikTok and Snapchat parent company Snap Inc. were initially named as defendants but each settled for undisclosed sums before the trial began.