Tag: lawsuits

Jury in Los Angeles finds Meta, YouTube negligent in social media addiction trial

A jury in Los Angeles determined on Wednesday that Meta and Google’s YouTube were negligent and failed to warn users of the dangers associated with using their platforms, in a case that could have repercussions across the social media and the broader technology market.

The personal injury trial commenced in late January in Los Angeles Superior Court. A young woman identified as K.G.M., or Kaley, alleged that she became addicted to apps like Instagram and YouTube as a child. Deliberations began Friday, March 13.

Jurors ultimately ruled in favor of the plaintiff, who claimed that Meta and YouTube’s negligence played a “substantial factor” in causing mental health-related harms. Compensatory damages were assessed at $3 million, with Meta on the hook for 70% and YouTube the remaining 30%. The next phase of the trial will determine punitive damages.

“We respectfully disagree with the verdict and are evaluating our legal options,” a Meta spokesperson said in a statement.

It’s one of several trials taking place this year that experts have characterized as the social media industry’s “Big Tobacco” moment, comparing it the 1990s, when tobacco companies were forced to pay billions of dollars for lying to the public about the safety and potential harms of their products.

On Tuesday, jurors in Santa Fe, New Mexico found that Meta willfully violated the state’s unfair practices after Attorney General Raúl Torrez alleged that the company failed to properly safeguard its apps from online predators targeting children. Meta was ordered to pay $375 million in damages based on the number of violations. The company said that it would appeal the case.

The New Mexico case is separate from other social media lawsuits that state attorneys general have brought against companies including Meta and TikTok.

During the six-week trial in L.A., jury members were tasked with determining whether Meta and YouTube implemented certain design features in their apps like recommendation algorithms and auto-play that contributed to K.G.M.’s crippling, mental distress. The 20-year-old woman alleged that she suffered from severe body dysmorphia, depression and suicidal thoughts due to her near-constant use of the apps and the constant notifications that made it difficult for her to stop.

Keep reading

Bayer’s Monsanto sues mRNA COVID-19 vaccine makers

Bayer’s agrochemicals unit Monsanto has filed lawsuits in the US against the manufacturers of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, claiming that they used its patent-protected technology in their products.

One lawsuit – filed in a federal court in Delaware – asserts that Pfizer/BioNTech’s Comirnaty and Moderna’s Spikevax vaccines, which generated tens of billions of dollars in revenues during the pandemic, used technology developed by Monsanto in the 1980s designed to eliminate ‘problem’ coding sequences in the building blocks of cells “to improve mRNA stability and the amount or quality of protein produced” in crops.

The technology was awarded a US patent in 2010 (No. 7,741,118) and is not due to expire until June 2027. According to the suit, Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna used it to stabilise their mRNA vaccines.

“To develop effective mRNA medicines, defendants needed to stabilise the mRNA molecule and optimise its protein expression,” it claims, adding that they “optimised and manufactured their infringing mRNA vaccine products starting with a DNA template” and using Monsanto’s patented process.

Meanwhile, Reuters has also reported that Bayer independently filed a similar lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson in a New Jersey federal court, contending that a DNA-based process the company used in manufacturing its adenovirus vector-based COVID-19 vaccine also infringes the patent.

The shot – known as the Janssen vaccine – won emergency authorisations in the US and other markets and made blockbuster sales in the pandemic before its use diminished due to concerns about rare clotting side effects. It was withdrawn from sale in the US in 2023.

While sales are well down on their peak, Comirnaty brought in worldwide revenues of more than $3.3 billion for Pfizer and BioNTech last year, with Moderna earning $3.2 billion from Spikevax.

Bayer has said it does not intend to do anything that would restrict the commercial use of the COVID-19 vaccines – although, that is already being achieved due to changing immunisation policies in the US under the Trump administration – but is seeking damages “in an amount adequate to compensate” for the infringement of its intellectual property and royalties on sales.

Keep reading

Meta ordered to pay $375 MILLION for not protecting minors from predators online

A jury has found that Meta failed to protect children from sexual predators as well as misled users, and the tech giant has been ordered to pay $375 million in civil penalties.

A New Mexico jury found in the landmark case that Meta misled users about the platform’s safety and did not protect children being exploited, thereby violating the state’s laws. The jury made the decision after there were testimonies from witnesses over the course of six weeks. Witnesses included ex-executives from Meta, teachers, as well as online safety experts, per the New York Post.

The prosecutors in the state argued that Meta had hidden the extent to which the platform endangered children with the threat of sexual predators using the social media platform to target minors. Facebook and Instagram failed to enforce their policies of those under 13 not having profiles and algorithms allegedly made it easier to target minors for sex trafficking and harassment.

“The safety issues that you’ve heard about in this case, weren’t mistakes,” New Mexico attorney Linda Singer said on Monday. “They were a product of a corporate philosophy that chose growth and engagement over children’s safety. And young people in this state and around the country have borne the cost.”

Meta has vowed to appeal to the ruling in the case. “We respectfully disagree with the verdict and will appeal. We work hard to keep people safe on our platforms and are clear about the challenges of identifying and removing bad actors or harmful content. We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online,” a spokesman said in a statement in response to the verdict.

The attorneys for New Mexico had been seeking $2 billion in penalties against Meta, significantly more than what was given as a penalty to Meta. The case was brought by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez. In closing arguments, Meta attorney Kevin Huff said of the case, “Meta has built innovative, automated tools to protect people. Meta has 40,000 people working to make its apps as safe as possible.”

Keep reading

Musk found guilty of misleading investors

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has been found guilty in California of misleading investors during his $44 billion purchase of Twitter in 2022.

The class-action lawsuit, which had been filed shortly before Musk took control of the social media platform that he subsequently re-branded as X, focused on two tweets and comments made by the tech billionaire during a podcast in May 2022. Following those statements, including a post claiming that the Twitter deal was “temporarily on hold,” the company’s shares plunged by almost 10% in a single session.

The nine-man jury in San Francisco delivered its verdict on Friday, stating that the tech billionaire did mislead the shareholders, who sold Twitter shares at a lower price as a result of his announcements, with the tweets.

However, it also found that there was nothing wrong with what Musk said on the podcast and that he did not intentionally “scheme” to mislead the investors.

Keep reading

Storm of Allegations: Dozens of Epstein Survivors Sue Pam Bondi, Claim Years-Long Cover-Up in Explosive.

For years, the name Jeffrey Epstein has been synonymous with one of the most disturbing sex-trafficking scandals in modern history. Now, a new legal battle threatens to reopen old wounds and raise fresh questions about how powerful figures may have helped shield the disgraced financier from justice.

In a stunning development, dozens of Epstein’s victims—led by early accuser Maria Farmer—have filed a lawsuit against former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, accusing her of helping conceal critical information during the earlier handling of the Epstein case. The lawsuit, according to those involved, represents not just a legal fight but a desperate attempt by survivors to uncover the truth behind decisions that allowed Epstein to avoid harsher punishment for years.

The group of victims says they have already spent more than $1.1 million pursuing the lawsuit, determined to expose what they believe were deliberate failures and possible misconduct by officials responsible for overseeing the case.

Keep reading

States Sue Trump Over New Tariffs Imposed Under 1974 Trade Act

A coalition of 24 Democrat-led states has filed a sweeping federal lawsuit against President Donald Trump and several federal agencies and officials, arguing that their latest tariffs violate both federal law and the U.S. Constitution. The case, filed last Thursday in the United States Court of International Trade, challenges tariffs imposed under long-dormant Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 right after the Supreme Court struck down the administration’s earlier “emergency” tariff policy.

The states are asking the court to block the tariffs and order refunds for the costs already paid.

A New Tariff Strategy

The legal battle began after a major ruling from the Supreme Court on February 20.

In Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the Court ruled that the administration could not impose sweeping tariffs using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). That law allows presidents to respond to economic emergencies, but the Court concluded that it does not authorize tariffs. The ruling was a significant blow to the administration’s trade policy. For more than a year, the White House had been imposing global tariffs using IEEPA.

But the administration swiftly adopted a new strategy. Per the challenge:

Having lost the battle on IEEPA, the President now dusts off a separate statute: Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, 19 U.S.C. § 2132, which is another statute that has never been used to impose tariffs. Indeed, it has never been used at all.

On the same day the Supreme Court decision was issued, Trump signed a proclamation invoking Section 122 to impose a 10-percent tariff on most imports worldwide for a period of 150 days. The new tariff took effect on February 24.

The next day, the president announced on Truth Social that the tariff would rise to 15 percent — the maximum rate allowed by the statute. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent later confirmed the prospect.

Keep reading

Former MLB prospect sues White Sox for millions over COVID-19 vaccine injury

An awful vaccine side effect has allegedly sidelined a baseball player for the rest of his life.

Isaiah Carranza was drafted by the Chicago White Sox in 2018 but never made it to the major leagues. Now, Carranza is suing his former organization, saying it denied his vaccine injury after he was “coerced” into getting the shot.

Carranza played two years in High-A, the third-highest level of minor league baseball in the United States. However, 2022 was the last time he appeared in a game, and the former pitcher has since alleged that team officials warned him he would be “blacklisted” if he didn’t get a COVID-19 vaccine.

According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Carranza claimed if he did not get two doses, his organization would not release him from his contract so that he could pursue other teams. At the same time, he was allegedly told he had “no prospects of moving up” within the White Sox’s organization.

After getting the Pfizer vaccine, Carranza says he soon began suffering “extreme dizziness, nausea, near-fainting, and wildly fluctuating heart rate,” but the team told him it was simply dehydration, anxiety, and “rookie nerves.”

Carranza also allegedly began experiencing severe pain and dysfunction in his pitching arm.

“After receiving the vaccine, Plaintiff suffered severe adverse health reactions with little to no support from Defendants, who denied him necessary accommodations,” the lawsuit said, according to Newsmax.

Carranza also claimed that the injury impaired his ability to throw at a professional level and essentially ended his career. He is reportedly seeking $19 million in damages and has an estimated $557,000 price tag in future medical expenses.

The MLB did not have an official vaccine mandate but encouraged players to get vaccinated through its union and the league.

Carranza’s legal team said on its website that minor league players lacked union representation and the financial security to safely speak out against the “condition of employment.”

Keep reading

Transparency: Suing Schools That Hide Trans Kids’ Identities From Parents

A few weeks before Christmas in 2022, Amber Lavigne was cleaning her 13-year-old’s bedroom when she stumbled upon her daughter’s secret: a chest binder. She learned that Autumn had been wearing the garment, which girls use to flatten their breasts to achieve a masculine appearance, for about two months at school in Maine, where she had adopted a boy’s name, Leo, and was using he/him pronouns.

It was the first of two chest binders Lavigne found that had been provided to her eighth-grade daughter by a social worker at the Great Salt Bay Community School, according to a federal lawsuit Lavigne filed in 2023, which is now pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. Her lawsuit alleges that the public school not only aided and abetted Autumn’s gender transition but also hid the information from her parents.

“I think it’s important for parents to know that this is occurring in our public schools because I don’t think many parents believe that it’s as bad as it really is,” Lavigne said on a recent podcast. “When I was a kid, one of the first things I heard about adults is if any adult asks you as a child to keep a secret, there’s something wrong with that adult, and you need to come tell me immediately.”

“And now, I mean, it’s like we’re in upside-down land.”

The Maine lawsuit and others like it raise one of the most contentious issues in the broader conflict over transgender policies: whether a parent’s constitutional right to direct their children’s education and medical care extends to a circumstance that society has never grappled with until the past decade or so – a youth’s rejection of their biological sex, adoption of a new name and matching pronouns, and assertion of a new gender identity. And to what extent children who are transitioning or exploring gender options have the right to confidentiality if they worry about rejection and hostility at home.

Keep reading

New Jersey Democrat Assemblywoman Sponsors Vulgar ‘F**K ICE’ Bill to Sue Federal Immigration Agents

Democrat New Jersey Assemblywoman Katie Brennan has co-sponsored a bill called the “Fight Unlawful Conduct and Keep Individuals and Communities Empowered Act,” or “F-CK ICE” Act.

The legislation aims to make it easier for individuals to file civil lawsuits against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents for alleged constitutional violations during immigration enforcement operations.

A video clip of Brennan promoting the bill has gone viral on X, as conservatives blast it and the unhinged left cheers.

In the footage, Brennan smirks while explaining the bill’s “spicy name” and its serious intent to “sue the hell out of ICE” for what she calls unlawful conduct.

“Because right now, it’s really hard to hold them accountable or to press any criminal charges despite all of their unlawful conduct,” Brennan says in the video. “No, we’re gonna sue the hell out of them if we can.”

The bill was introduced on February 24 and is co-sponsored by Brennan and Assemblyman Ravi Bhalla, the former mayor of Hoboken.

An identical version has been introduced in the Senate.

According to the official summary from the New Jersey Legislature, the act “permits civil action for violations of US Constitution related to immigration enforcement.”

It would allow New Jersey residents to sue federal immigration officials in state courts for monetary damages, including punitive and psychological damages, attorney’s fees, and other relief if their constitutional rights are violated.

The bill requires the use of body-worn cameras and the provision of identification upon request by agents.

Brennan, a first-term assemblywoman representing parts of Hudson County including Jersey City, has defended the bill’s name and purpose.

In statements reported by NJ.com, she said the measure “speaks for itself,” adding, “There have to be real consequences if ICE breaks the law.”

The Ridgewood Blog, a conservative New Jersey outlet, called it “a new low for the Garden State,” pointing out that ICE agents in New Jersey recently arrested migrants with convictions for child-sex crimes.

The bill has been referred to the Assembly Oversight, Reform, and Federal Relations Committee, with a potential vote expected soon before heading to Governor Mikie Sherrill’s desk.

Keep reading

New Jersey Cities Must Explain Marijuana Business Denials, Court Says

New Jersey’s cannabis industry scored a victory Tuesday when a state appellate panel ruled that municipalities must explain why they deny requests for local support to open dispensaries, a decision that could have implications for legal weed retailers statewide.

The 23-page decision rejects an argument by the Burlington City Council that it is allowed to reject those requests without explaining why. The council was sued by the owners of a planned cannabis dispensary after council members denied the owners’ request for a resolution of local support, a document required to open recreational cannabis dispensaries in New Jersey.

“While the City Council was permitted to consider all relevant evidence and has wide discretion under its general police powers to deny the issuance of an ROS, we hold that the City Council has to provide a discernible reason for its determination,” reads the ruling by Judge Lisa Perez Friscia.

Tuesday’s decision rejects a lower court judge’s ruling that required Burlington to issue the resolution of support to the owners of the planned dispensary, called Higher Breed. The newer ruling requires the Burlington council to reconsider Higher Breed’s request for support and then issue a resolution that provides a basis for the council’s decision.

A request for comment from Higher Breed’s attorneys was not returned.

New Jersey voters opted in 2020 to legalize cannabis, but the state’s legalization law allowed towns to opt out of cannabis sales, and about 70 percent of towns did so. The Cannabis Regulatory Commission, which is tasked with approving cannabis retail licenses, requires prospective license holders to obtain a resolution of local support from the town where they plan to operate.

In December 2023, Higher Breed, owned by Jim and Karen Waltz, applied to the Burlington City Council for a resolution of local support for a store on East Route 130. After hearing from a real estate broker who does not live in Burlington and claimed the property’s owner was “dishonest” and owed him a real estate commission, the council ultimately rejected Higher Breed’s request for a resolution of local support. Higher Breed then sued.

Keep reading