The consolidated appeals arose from lawsuits brought by San Diego Unified School District, the School Board of Brevard County, Florida, Vancouver School District No. 37, and West Warwick Public Schools. The districts asserted negligence and public nuisance claims under the laws of California, Florida, Washington and Rhode Island, alleging that social media platforms contributed to student mental health issues and caused the districts to incur additional costs, divert staff resources and experience property damage. 

In a published opinion authored by Justice Anne K. Richardson, with Presiding Justice Elwood Lui and Justice Brian M. Goorvitch concurring, the California Court of Appeal concluded that the school districts had failed to state viable negligence or public nuisance claims and affirmed the judgment in full. The court concluded that the districts could not recover their alleged purely economic losses under the negligence laws at issue and that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act immunized the defendants from liability for property damage claims premised on third-party “challenge videos.” The court also rejected the districts’ public nuisance claims under the applicable state laws. The appeal followed a June 2024 ruling by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Carolyn Kuhl, who sustained the defendants’ demurrer to the four complaints without leave to amend. The appellate court affirmed that judgment. 

King & Spalding represented TikTok Inc. and ByteDance Inc. through a team including Paul Watford, who argued the appeal on behalf of all defendants, Geoff Drake, David Mattern and Bailey Langner.