Two recent jury verdicts against Meta and Google are drawing attention as early signals of evolving liability risks, according to a new Moody’s report. In separate cases, juries found the companies liable under claims that certain harms were linked to software platforms engineered to maximise user engagement.
Moody’s stressed that the verdicts are just an initial data point. The broader significance reportedly lies less in the outcomes themselves than in what they indicate about the emerging trajectory of design-focused liability theories, particularly those related to AI, and how insurers can proactively manage new risks as both technology and legal frameworks continue to evolve.
On March 24, 2026, a jury in State of New Mexico v. Meta Platforms, Inc. found Meta liable under the state’s updated 2025 Unfair Practices Act for “willful deception” and “unconscionable business practices.”
The next day, in K.G.M. (Kaley) v. Meta, Google, et al., a Los Angeles jury held Meta and Google (via YouTube) liable on negligence claims tied to a now-20-year-old plaintiff’s use of their platforms.
“What is critical for (re)insurers to understand is not the size of these verdicts, but the underlying theory of harm, which in these cases involved claims tied to allegedly engagement-driven software design,” the new report, authored by Adam Grossman, Director – Product Management, Moody’s, and Taro Ramberg, Director – Marketing, Moody’s, said.
According to the co-authors, with the initial verdicts now in the spotlight and the scope of litigation becoming clearer, the key question for (re)insurers extends beyond these cases to how the underlying liability theories may translate into coverage, accumulation and broader portfolio exposure.
“This shifts the focus to the underlying basis for liability and what it could mean for portfolios, both for these cases and for others already in the pipeline or still to come,” Moody’s report continued.
For insurers, the report said that the deeper challenge is that historical loss experience alone cannot capture risks of this kind before they begin to surface in litigation.
Moody’s said that emerging casualty risks are often byproducts of technological change, with exposure accumulating ahead of claims and legal validation. Identifying, monitoring, and managing those risks requires forward-looking analytical approaches that reflect how new technologies could translate into liability through scientific discovery and legal innovation.
“In situations like addictive software litigation, the risk is beginning to emerge, but forward-looking modeling, such as CoMeta – now in its twelfth year – remains critical for understanding how exposure may sit within a (re)insurer’s book and where aggregation could be building,” the report added.
The co-authors concluded, “As claims emerge and resolve, standard actuarial approaches that blend early loss experience with projections of ultimate loss from forward-looking models remain essential for managing reserves and cash flows. Forward-looking analytics complement those fundamentals by helping insurers interpret limited early signals in the context of evolving science, legal theories, and product design practices.
“More broadly, a forward-looking approach to emerging risk management helps (re)insurers set and maintain disciplined appetites for accumulation across hazards that could, over time, translate into loss. Not every emerging risk matures into litigation or insured loss.”
