Attorney Michael Rehm — (800) 978-0754
Attorney Michael Rehm represents teenagers and families harmed by social media platforms throughout San Jose and California. Meta (Facebook and Instagram), TikTok, and Snapchat are defendants in a wave of personal injury lawsuits alleging that their platforms were designed to maximize engagement among minors in ways that caused or contributed to anxiety, depression, eating disorders, self-harm, and suicide. Meta is headquartered in Menlo Park — ten miles from downtown San Jose. These cases have been consolidated in a federal multidistrict litigation in the Northern District of California.
What the Lawsuits Allege
The lawsuits against Meta, TikTok, Snapchat, and other platforms allege that these companies designed their products with features — algorithmic content recommendation, infinite scroll, engagement-maximizing notification systems, social validation mechanics like likes and follower counts — that they knew were psychologically harmful to adolescents, particularly teenage girls. Plaintiffs allege that internal research at these companies documented the harms and that the companies concealed this research while publicly claiming their platforms were safe for young users.
The legal theories include product liability for defective design, negligence, fraudulent concealment, and in some cases, claims under California's consumer protection laws. The defective design theory argues that the platform itself — not merely the content on it — is the defective product, because its design foreseeably causes psychological harm to a known vulnerable user population. This framing is significant because it challenges the platforms' Section 230 immunity argument: Section 230 shields platforms from liability for third-party content, but not from liability arising from their own product design choices.
Federal MDL — Northern District of California
Federal social media harm cases against Meta and other platforms have been consolidated in multidistrict litigation in the Northern District of California. The MDL coordinates discovery and pretrial proceedings across thousands of individual cases. California state court claims may proceed separately. The Northern District of California — which covers San Jose — is the home court for this litigation, making it particularly relevant to Bay Area families whose children have been harmed.
Who May Have a Claim
Teenagers who developed anxiety, depression, eating disorders, body dysmorphia, self-harm behaviors, or suicidal ideation that they or their treating providers attribute in part to social media use may have claims. Parents whose minor children experienced these harms may also have claims. The strength of a claim depends on the nature and severity of the harm, the age at which the minor began using the platform, the extent of platform use, and the availability of medical documentation connecting the harm to platform use.
Statute of Limitations
The applicable statute of limitations depends on the specific claims asserted and the age of the victim. For personal injury claims under California law, Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1 sets a two-year period, subject to tolling for minors under Code of Civil Procedure § 352. The discovery rule may also extend the period where the connection between platform use and harm was not reasonably discoverable earlier. Contact Attorney Michael Rehm to assess the specific timeline in your case.
Related Pages
- San Jose Personal Injury Attorney
- San Jose Roblox Sexual Exploitation Attorney
- San Jose Video Game Addiction Attorney
- San Jose Defective Product Attorney
Attorney Michael Rehm represents teenagers and families harmed by social media platforms throughout San Jose and California on a contingency fee basis. No fee without a recovery. Call (800) 978-0754 for a free consultation.
The information on this page is general legal information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case turns on its own facts. The law can change — statutes are amended, cases are decided, and regulations are revised; nothing on this page should be relied upon as a statement of current law without verification. Deadlines and legal bars discussed on this page are general guides — whether a particular deadline applies, has run, or is subject to tolling, and whether a particular doctrine bars or limits recovery in your case, requires individual analysis. Contact Attorney Michael Rehm to discuss the specific facts of your situation.