AI Chatbot Litigation: The Next Frontier in Product Liability and Litigation

Matthew P. Bergman
Matthew P. Bergman | Social Media Victims Law Center

Matthew P. Bergman is an attorney, law professor, philanthropist, and advocate who has become the nation's leading legal voice on social media accountability. As founder of the Social Media Victims Law Center, he pioneered the use of product liability law to overcome Section 230—the shield social media companies had relied on for decades to evade responsibility for their dangerously defective platforms—and his firm now represents more than 2,500 clients harmed by these companies.

Live Video-Broadcast: September 17, 2026

2 hour CLE

Tuition: $195.00
Subscribe to Federal Bar Association CLE Pass...
Co-Sponsored by myLawCLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ of live webinars.
Learn More
Training 5 or more people?

Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs

Program Summary

 

Chatbot psychological injury claims are surviving motions to dismiss — and the defense playbook is already written

AI chatbot psychological injury litigation has moved from theory to filed cases. Causes of action are surviving motions to dismiss. MDL 3047 and California JCCP No. 5431 are already generating procedural lessons. A January 2026 California JCCP ruling informs how plaintiffs structure their expert teams.

Plead the wrong cause of action and Section 230 or the First Amendment ends the case at the pleading stage. Miss evidence preservation at intake and the chat logs that prove causation disappear. Frame harm as sole cause and the superseding-cause defense takes over in suicide cases. Face a Daubert challenge without differential etiology methodology and the pre-existing condition defense wins.

Attendees leave with practitioner work product. That includes an intake screening framework, statutory duty hooks, and a session-by-session chat-log causation timeline method. It closes with strategies for rebutting Daubert attacks and anticipating the defense playbook from day one. The value is practitioner judgment — screening calls and framing decisions no doctrinal summary supplies.

Key topics to be discussed:

  • Intake Screening Framework
    Screen chatbot psychological injury claims for viability at intake and preserve the chat logs that prove causation before they disappear.
  • Pleading Around Immunity
    Use statutory duty hooks to plead causes of action that survive Section 230 and First Amendment defenses at the pleading stage.
  • Chat-Log Causation Timelines
    Build a session-by-session chat-log causation timeline connecting chatbot interactions to self-harm, suicide, and psychotic-episode claims.
  • LLM Defect Theories
    Frame sycophancy, automorphism, and the probabilistic reasoning of large language models as product defects in the emerging intimacy economy.
  • The Defense Playbook
    Anticipate superseding-cause and pre-existing condition defenses, plus liability claims stemming from inaccurate or harmful chatbot advice, as standards of care and regulation evolve.
  • Daubert Expert Strategy
    Defend psychiatric expert opinions with differential etiology methodology, informed by the January 2026 California JCCP ruling on plaintiff expert teams and MDL 3047 procedural lessons.

This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.

Date / Time: September 17, 2026

  • 12:00 pm – 2:10 pm Eastern
  • 11:00 am – 1:10 pm Central
  • 10:00 am – 12:10 pm Mountain
  • 9:00 am – 11:10 am Pacific

Closed-captioning available

Speakers

Matthew P. Bergman, Founding Attorney | Social Media Victims Law Center

Matthew P. Bergman is an attorney, law professor, philanthropist, and advocate who has become the nation’s leading legal voice on social media accountability. As founder of the Social Media Victims Law Center, he pioneered the use of product liability law to overcome Section 230—the shield social media companies had relied on for decades to evade responsibility for their dangerously defective platforms—and his firm now represents more than 2,500 clients harmed by these companies. A veteran product liability litigator who has recovered over $1 billion for his clients, Matthew has carried the fight for injured victims from the courtroom to legislatures on both sides of the Atlantic.

  • Education & Credentials

Matthew earned his J.D. magna cum laude from Lewis & Clark Law School in 1989, where he was elected to the Cornelius Honor Society, and his B.A. in Sociology from Reed College in 1986. He is admitted to practice in Washington and Oregon and before numerous federal district courts and the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Ninth and Tenth Circuits. Following law school, he clerked for Judge Bobby R. Baldock of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Matthew has been named a Washington Super Lawyer every year since 2005 and is recognized among the National Trial Lawyers’ Top 100. He received the Lewis & Clark Law School Distinguished Graduate Award in 2009. Over his career he has been appointed by the U.S. Trustee to represent asbestos claimants in more than a dozen major bankruptcy proceedings—including Kaiser Aluminum, Owens Corning/Fibreboard, Halliburton, and Georgia Pacific—and appointed by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court to serve on the trust advisory committees of several multibillion-dollar asbestos victims’ trusts.

  • Professional Involvement

Beyond the courtroom, Matthew is a driving force in the global movement for online safety, working with lawmakers across the United States and Members of Parliament in the United Kingdom to protect children and young adults from the predatory design of social media. He teaches as an adjunct professor at Lewis & Clark Law School, where he created the litigation strategy course “Litigation and the Art of War.” His civic and philanthropic commitments are wide-ranging: he founded the Maasai Children’s Initiative, which built solar-powered schools and a well serving 300 Maasai girls in southern Kenya, and he serves on the boards of institutions spanning higher education (Lewis & Clark College and Law School), civil rights and worker protection (the Mississippi Center for Justice and Working Washington), national security (the American Jewish Committee’s Arabian Gulf Institute), and the arts (the Tacoma Art Museum and Seattle Repertory Theater). He is a member of numerous bar and trial lawyer associations, including the American Association for Justice and the Washington State Association for Justice.

  • Experience

Matthew is nationally known for his product liability work, having litigated more than 1,200 product liability cases, conducted over 25 jury trials, and served as counsel in more than 20 reported appellate decisions. Before founding the Social Media Victims Law Center, he founded Bergman Draper Oslund Udo, the leading asbestos law firm in the Pacific Northwest, where he represented more than 850 mesothelioma victims and secured over $900 million in recoveries, shaping Washington and Oregon toxic-tort law through landmark appellate rulings on duty to warn and “take-home” asbestos exposure. He has testified before the U.S. Congress and chaired and keynoted national and international seminars on toxic tort litigation and bankruptcy. Today, he applies that deep product liability expertise to holding technology companies accountable—representing “KGM,” the family behind a recent groundbreaking jury verdict against Meta and Google that pushes the industry closer to overhauling the algorithms designed to target and addict users—and his scholarship, including “Assaulting the Citadel of Section 230 Immunity,” is helping define the emerging law of social media and AI accountability.

Agenda

SESSION 1 – AI Chatbots, Large Language Models, and Emerging Product Liability Risks | 12:00pm – 1:00pm ET

As artificial intelligence chatbots become increasingly integrated into everyday life, they are also creating new legal, ethical, and product liability challenges. This session explores the evolution of chatbot technology, beginning with the machine learning principles and self-improving algorithms that led to the development of today’s large language models (LLMs). Attendees will gain an understanding of how LLMs differ from traditional linear computing models and why their probabilistic reasoning can produce unpredictable or harmful outcomes.

The program will also examine the shift from the “attention economy” to the emerging “intimacy economy,” where AI systems are designed to foster increasingly personal and emotionally engaging interactions with users. Against this backdrop, the session will analyze potential product defects in AI chatbots, including issues such as automorphism—the tendency to attribute human characteristics and intent to AI systems—and sycophancy, where chatbots reinforce user beliefs or behaviors rather than providing accurate or balanced information. Through this discussion, participants will better understand the legal risks, emerging theories of liability, and practical considerations surrounding the design, deployment, and regulation of AI-powered conversational systems.

BREAK | 1:00pm – 1:10pm ET

SESSION 2 – AI Chatbots in Litigation: Emerging Liability, Malpractice, and Product Liability Claims | 1:10pm – 2:10pm ET

As AI chatbots become increasingly relied upon for information, advice, and emotional support, courts and regulators are beginning to confront the significant legal questions arising from their use. This session examines the growing body of cases involving allegations that chatbot interactions have contributed to self-harm, suicide, and psychotic episodes, as well as claims stemming from inaccurate or harmful advice that may give rise to malpractice and professional liability concerns. Attendees will explore the current landscape of pending litigation against AI developers and technology companies, including the legal theories being advanced by plaintiffs and the defenses likely to shape future case law. The program will conclude by addressing the broader challenges that lie ahead, including evolving standards of care, regulatory developments, product liability issues, and the responsibilities of organizations deploying AI-powered conversational systems in increasingly sensitive contexts.

Credits

Alaska

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through Alaska’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity.
Alabama

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arkansas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arizona

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

California

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Colorado

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Connecticut

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

District of Columbia

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Delaware

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Florida

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 General Hours

Receive CLE credit in Florida via attorney submission.
Georgia

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Hawaii

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Iowa

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Idaho

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Illinois

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Indiana

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Kansas

Pending CLE Approval
2 Substantive

Kentucky

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Louisiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Massachusetts

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maryland

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maine

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Michigan

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Minnesota

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Missouri

Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General

Mississippi

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Montana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Dakota

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through North Dakota’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity. Section 1, Policy 1.14
Nebraska

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

myLawCLE reports attendance to Nebraska on each attorney’s behalf for all programs. Please do not self-report.
New Hampshire

Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes

As of July 1, 2014, the NHMCLE Board no longer provides pre- or post-approval of courses. Attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance online at www.nhbar.org, based on qualification provisions of Rule 53.
New Jersey

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New Jersey’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity, except for the courses required under BCLE Reg. 201:2
New Mexico

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Nevada

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

New York

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New York’s Approved Jurisdiction Group “B”.
Ohio

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Oklahoma

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

Oregon

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Pennsylvania

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Rhode Island

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

South Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

South Dakota

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Tennessee

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Texas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Utah

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Virginia

Not Eligible
2 General Hours

Vermont

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Washington

Approved for CLE Credits
2 Law & Legal Hours

Wisconsin

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

West Virginia

Pending CLE Approval
2.4 General

Wyoming

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

More CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars
Derivatives, Digital Assets, and AI in Financial Markets
Derivatives, Digital Assets, and AI in Financial Markets Fri, September 11, 2026
Live Webcast