Students in Temple Law’s Tech Justice clinic, led by Professor Laura Bingham, made significant contributions to an early win in landmark litigation that seeks to hold an AI company and related entities liable for the death of a Florida teenager. As part of their participation in the clinic, Temple Law students Sarah Sitzler, Sarah Grynpas, Nick Hunsicker, and Erico S. Solis drafted arguments in response to defendants’ motions to dismiss. All claims on which the students worked survived, and the case will be moving on to discovery. The case, Garcia v Character Technologies, Noam Shazeer, Daniel De Frietas, Google LLC, and Alphabet Inc., is being heard in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division.
At issue at this stage of litigation was whether defendants Character Technologies Inc., its individual shareholders, Google LLC, and Alphabet Inc. could be found liable under several theories for the death by suicide of plaintiff’s teenaged son, who had downloaded the Character AI app and become addicted to engagement with its Character chatbots. Working with clinic partners at the Tech Justice Law Project, students drafted arguments about why plaintiff’s claims, which included products liability, secondary liability, aiding and abetting, and causes of action ranging from negligence per se to unjust enrichment, should survive defendants’ motions to dismiss.
Writing about the experience for Temple Law’s Voices blog, clinic student Nick Hunsicker described the work: “I was fortunate enough to draft an argument regarding secondary liability of a “Big Tech” company that was used in a motion to dismiss reply. Not only did this involve hours of research into corporate law and principles of aiding-and-abetting, but it also involved more applied work like combing through court dockets and SEC filings. My team and I took a crash course on what being a litigation associate might look like,” Hunsicker said.
“The impacts of technology in society are rapidly changing, diversifying, and expanding—unfortunately, this makes accountability and redress for tech-enabled harms more difficult, even bewildering,” said Professor Laura Bingham, who leads the clinic. “We saw a need to iterate on the rich foundations of clinical practice to serve social justice causes, adapt and enforce accountability frameworks, and promote access to justice for communities shouldering the brunt of tech harms. These are efforts that inspire our students, help them connect with the field and build their own networks, and give them a sense of agency and purpose in their law and technology work.”
The Tech Justice clinic prepares students to work at the intersection of data-fueled innovation, the rapid integration of new data-driven tools without adequate safeguards, and social justice movements. Students participate in both a seminar and a clinic component. The seminar provides a comprehensive exploration of current research, advocacy, litigation, and organizing efforts to reshape the information society. Topics include the ethical, philosophical, and practical implications of technologies such as artificial intelligence, biometrics, and digital finance. In the clinic, students participate in collaborative projects with external organizations, addressing systemic issues related to tech justice. These projects involve a wide range of activities, from legal research and drafting litigation materials to engaging directly with victims and survivors of tech-related harms, to working with advocates and developing innovative legal claims in active litigation in foreign and domestic jurisdictions. The clinic is part of Temple Law’s Institute for Law, Innovation & Technology, of which Bingham is executive director.
Meetali Jain is the Director of the Tech Justice Law Project (TJLP). “TJLP has been fortunate to partner with Temple Law’s Tech Justice Clinic on a number of projects over the last couple of years, and has been valuably enriched by the students’ enthusiasm, unwavering work ethic, and useful work product,” Jain said. “This spring, the students in the clinic provided invaluable assistance in our case against Character AI and Google, staying steadfastly committed to a client-centered approach and never backing down from their investigation into novel legal theories. We look forward to continuing to build this institutional relationship.”