A combined trial of two young plaintiffs' social media addiction claims against Meta, YouTube, and Snap is scheduled to begin October 28, 2026, in Los Angeles Superior Court before Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl. It is the next test case in California's coordinated proceeding. Its outcome does not decide any other family's claim.

If your family has been following the social media lawsuits, you have probably seen a lot of headlines this year: a jury verdict in March, a large settlement between Meta and the states in August, and now another trial. It is reasonable to wonder which of these matter for your child.

This article explains what the October 28 trial is, who is involved, and how it connects to claims like yours. We will update it as the trial moves forward.

What is the October 28 trial?

It is the next bellwether trial in JCCP 5255, the coordinated proceeding that gathers California state court social media addiction cases in front of one judge in Los Angeles. A bellwether is a test case: a small number of individual lawsuits are tried first so both sides can see how juries respond to the evidence and arguments that thousands of other cases share.

Two plaintiffs, identified in court records only by their initials, S.J. and K.D.B., will have their cases heard together by the same jury. Judge Kuhl granted the plaintiffs' request to combine the trials in late August. Meta objected to the combined format.

Who are the defendants, and why isn't TikTok one of them?

The defendants at trial are Meta, which owns Instagram and Facebook, Google's YouTube, and Snap, which owns Snapchat.

TikTok was named in these cases but settled with both plaintiffs in August, on terms that were not made public. That follows a pattern. TikTok has settled every California bellwether case before a jury heard it, including the first trial earlier this year.

Snap has also settled earlier bellwether cases before trial. If this trial goes forward with Snap still in it, it would be the first time a jury in this litigation hears Snap's defense.

How is this different from the first trial?

The first bellwether trial ended in March 2026, when a Los Angeles jury found Meta and YouTube liable to a young woman identified as K.G.M., who said her compulsive use of their platforms as a child harmed her mental health. The trial judge later upheld that verdict.

The October trial differs in three ways. It involves two plaintiffs instead of one, Snap is a defendant at trial rather than having settled, and each plaintiff has their own history, platforms, and injuries for the jury to weigh. A verdict for one plaintiff does not mean the same result for the other.

What are the plaintiffs alleging?

The lawsuits claim that the platforms were designed to keep young users engaged as long as possible, through features like infinite scroll, autoplay, push notifications, and recommendation algorithms, and that the companies knew about risks to minors' mental health without adequately warning families.

These are allegations. The companies deny them and argue, among other things, that the plaintiffs' struggles had other causes.

The focus on design matters legally. A federal law known as Section 230 generally shields platforms from liability for content their users post. The California court has allowed claims about how the products themselves were built to go to a jury, rather than claims about what other users posted.

Could the trial still be called off?

Yes. This litigation has a history of cases changing shape right before trial. Snap and TikTok both settled with K.G.M. shortly before her trial began. The second scheduled bellwether, set for July, came off the calendar after settlements and a dismissal. A third plaintiff originally set for October dismissed her claims in August.

Any of the remaining defendants could settle before or during trial. If that happens, we will note it here.

What does this trial mean for your family's claim?

A bellwether verdict does not decide anyone else's case. It gives attorneys on both sides information about how juries react to the evidence, which can influence how the remaining cases are valued and whether broader settlement talks happen. It does not award anything to other families.

This is also not a class action, where one case resolves a whole group's claims together. Each family's claim is its own lawsuit, built on its own records. That is also why the Meta settlement with the states does not cover individual families. We explain that in more detail in Does the Meta state settlement cover my family's claim?

Wondering whether your family's situation fits these cases?

The free case review asks a few questions and takes about two minutes. It is confidential, and there is no obligation.

Check your eligibility

Should you wait for the verdict before looking into a claim?

There is no need to wait, and waiting has a real cost. Every state has a statute of limitations, a legal deadline for filing a lawsuit, and that clock runs on its own schedule whether or not a trial is happening in Los Angeles. For harm to a minor, the deadline often begins later than it would for an adult, but rules vary by state and by situation.

A case review does not commit you to anything. It tells you whether your situation fits the litigation and, if it does, what the deadline in your state looks like. If you used these platforms as a teenager yourself and are now an adult, see Can you file a social media claim for your own teenage use?

If your child is in crisis right now, you can call or text 988 to reach the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline at any hour.

Will families be contacted if the plaintiffs win?
No. A verdict in a bellwether trial applies only to the plaintiffs in that trial. It does not trigger notices or payments to anyone else. Other claims move forward separately through the attorneys handling them.
How long could the trial last?
The first bellwether trial in Los Angeles took about two months from jury selection to verdict. A trial with two plaintiffs and three defendants could run longer, and the schedule can change if any defendant settles.
Does this trial include the federal social media cases?
No. It is in California state court. Federal cases are consolidated in MDL 3047, a multidistrict litigation before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in the Northern District of California, which runs on its own schedule.
Does a settlement before trial mean a company admitted fault?
No. Companies settle for many reasons, and a settlement is not a court finding of liability. The terms of the pretrial settlements in these California cases have been kept confidential.

Sources: Los Angeles County Superior Court, Social Media Cases, JCCP 5255; Meta Platforms, Inc., Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2026; public reporting on the court's August 2026 consolidation order.

Disclaimer: This article is general information, not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Injury Advocate Group is an advertising service, not a law firm. Litigation status changes; eligibility can only be confirmed through a case review with an attorney.