Video Game Addiction Lawsuit Payout & Settlement Amounts

Video game lawsuit claims represent an emerging area of product liability law where plaintiffs allege that gaming companies intentionally designed addictive features to increase player engagement and spending, causing significant harm to users’ mental and physical health, relationships, and financial well-being.

These cases typically center on claims that video game developers employed “dark patterns”, or manipulative design techniques including loot boxes, variable reward systems, and social pressure mechanisms in order to create and sustain addictive behaviors that encourage compulsive play.

Settlement amounts in these cases vary significantly based on factors including the severity of addiction, age of the plaintiff, documented treatment costs, and the extent of financial and personal damages incurred.

While the litigation is still developing, early case outcomes and regulatory settlements provide insight into potential compensation ranges that could extend from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars for the most severely impacted plaintiffs.

Types of Damages Claimed in Gaming Addiction Cases

Gaming addiction lawsuits encompass multiple categories of damages that reflect the comprehensive impact these conditions can have on an individual’s life when they began playing video games excessively.

Economic damages that form the foundation of most claims include, but are not limited to:

• Reimbursement for excessive in-game purchases that can total thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars per player, particularly in games featuring loot boxes or pay-to-win mechanics
• Medical treatment costs for specialized gaming addiction therapy range from $75 to $300 per session
• Intensive outpatient programs cost $1,400 to $10,000 for a 30-day treatment cycle
• Residential treatment programs potentially exceeding $50,000 for comprehensive care

Lost income calculations in gaming addiction cases consider both immediate and long-term financial impacts that may include:

1. Immediate wage losses from excessive play that interferes with work performance
2. Long-term career damage from prolonged periods of addiction
3. Educational disruption damages particularly relevant for young players
4. Dropped courses, delayed graduation, or abandoned educational opportunities with lifelong earning implications

If you or a loved one has experienced significant educational or career setbacks due to gaming addiction, you may be eligible to seek compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation that can determine your eligibility to join others in filing a Video Game Addiction Lawsuit today.

Non-economic damages in gaming addiction cases address the profound psychological and social impacts of these conditions (especially evident in violent video games that expose players to extreme content).

These damages encompass:

• Pain and suffering calculations accounting for mental anguish, depression, and anxiety commonly associated with gaming addiction
• Loss of enjoyment of life damages recognizing how these conditions can rob individuals of meaningful experiences and relationships
• Family relationship damages increasingly recognized in cases where gaming addiction has led to divorce, custody disputes, or severe family dysfunction
• Punitive damages that may apply when evidence demonstrates video game manufacturers knew their design features made games addictive but continued to target vulnerable populations, particularly minors, for financial gain

How Settlement Values Are Calculated in Gaming Litigation

Settlement valuations in gaming addiction cases employ methodologies adapted from established personal injury and addiction litigation frameworks that hold gaming companies accountable.

Attorneys typically use calculation approaches that consider the following multipliers:

1. Pain and Suffering Multiplier: Your proven financial losses are increased by a factor between 1.5 and 4 times the original amount, based on how severe and long-lasting your addiction became
2. Vulnerable Population Multiplier: Compensation amounts for teenagers and young gamers typically receive higher increases due to the long-term effects on their future potential and life opportunities
3. Developmental Vulnerability: Adolescent and young adult brains are more easily affected by addictive gameplay mechanics, which can justify additional compensation for this increased biological risk

Economic damage calculations require detailed documentation and expert testimony about the video game industry practices.

The multiplier method accounts for case-specific factors that can significantly impact settlement values.

Factors That Increase or Decrease Settlement Amounts

Age at addiction onset represents the most significant factor influencing settlement values in gaming addiction cases, with documented evidence showing that addiction beginning in childhood or adolescence typically results in settlements 200-300% higher than adult-onset cases.

This differential reflects both the enhanced vulnerability of developing brains to addictive stimuli and the extended timeframe over which damages accumulate from problematic online gaming.

Cases involving players who developed addiction before age 16 often qualify for the highest settlement tiers due to the potential for lifelong impact on educational achievement, career development, and social functioning.

Treatment history and medical documentation substantially impact case values, with comprehensive records of therapy attempts, psychiatric treatment, and residential rehabilitation programs supporting higher settlement demands against major video game companies.

Conversely, cases lacking medical documentation or where plaintiffs declined recommended treatment may face reduced settlement offers.

The specific gaming mechanics involved also influence valuations, with cases involving loot boxes, gambling-style features, or pay-to-win systems often commanding premium settlements due to the clear predatory nature of these design elements used by game developers.

Gaming companies’ internal communications and design documents can dramatically increase settlement values when they reveal knowledge of addictive potential or deliberate targeting of vulnerable populations using psychological tactics.

Recent regulatory investigations and academic studies exposing dark patterns in popular games have strengthened the evidentiary foundation for these claims.

If evidence emerges that companies conducted internal research demonstrating addictive potential but failed to implement protective measures, punitive damage considerations may push settlements well above typical ranges, potentially reaching into the hundreds of thousands of dollars for severely impacted individuals with documented gaming history.

While comprehensive video game addiction settlements specific to behavioral addiction remain limited, several landmark cases and regulatory actions provide important precedents for establishing potential compensation levels for physical health issues resulting from extended gaming sessions.

The distinction between settlements addressing addictive design versus those specifically compensating addiction-related harm is important for setting realistic expectations, though both categories demonstrate gaming companies’ willingness to pay substantial sums to resolve claims related to harmful design practices.

The confidential nature of many settlement agreements means that publicly available information may not reflect the full scope of compensation actually paid to plaintiffs, with some estimates suggesting that actual settlement amounts may exceed published figures by significant margins in lawsuits against video game companies.

Individual Gaming Addiction Settlement Examples

Current publicly documented settlements in gaming addiction cases remain limited due to the emerging nature of this litigation, but available evidence suggests settlement ranges from $25,000 to $500,000 for individual cases with severe documented harm including aggressive behavior and gamer’s rage.

The highest settlement estimates apply to cases involving minors who experienced complete educational disruption, required extensive residential treatment, and incurred substantial family therapy costs to address relationship damage caused by gaming addiction to certain video games from companies like Sony Interactive Entertainment.

These premium settlements typically require comprehensive medical documentation, expert testimony regarding the addictive design features responsible for the harm, and evidence of significant economic losses extending beyond immediate treatment costs related to gaming habits.

Mid-range settlements, estimated between $75,000 and $200,000, appear to apply to cases involving adult plaintiffs with documented treatment attempts, substantial in-game spending losses, and clear evidence of career or relationship damage attributable to gaming addiction.

These cases often involve players who spent multiple years engaged in excessive gaming that interfered with work performance or educational achievement, requiring professional intervention to address the addictive behavior and its negative consequences.

Lower-tier settlements, ranging from $25,000 to $75,000, may apply to cases with shorter addiction periods, successful early intervention, or limited documentation of economic harm resulting from video game usage.

However, even these conservative estimates reflect recognition that gaming companies bear some responsibility for addiction-related harm when their products employ deliberate addictive design features.

For families dealing with gaming addiction impacts, consulting with experienced gaming litigation attorneys can help determine whether your specific circumstances might qualify for legal action and what compensation range might be realistic based on similar case outcomes, including emerging social media addiction lawsuits.

The confidential nature of most settlement agreements means that these ranges represent estimates based on available information rather than confirmed settlement amounts when video game companies accused of harmful practices settle cases.

Some legal experts suggest that actual settlements may exceed these public estimates, particularly in cases involving major gaming companies with substantial resources and strong motivation to avoid public trials that could expose internal documents regarding addictive design practices.

Class Action Lawsuit Results in Gaming Addiction Cases

Epic Games’ $245 million settlement with the Federal Trade Commission in 2022 provides the most significant precedent for establishing gaming company liability related to addictive design practices that harm physical health.

While this settlement addressed “dark patterns” that tricked players into unwanted purchases rather than addiction specifically, it establishes important precedent for gaming company responsibility for harmful design practices.

The FTC alleged that Epic used confusing interface designs and billing practices that particularly impacted vulnerable populations.

Current litigation targets major gaming companies through coordinated legal action:

• Over 100 cases consolidated in California Judicial Council Coordinated Proceeding (JCCP No. 5363) in Los Angeles Superior Court.
• Major defendants include Epic Games (Fortnite), Roblox Corporation, Microsoft (Minecraft), EA Sports, and Nintendo
• Epic Games reached a $2.75 million Canadian settlement for loot box practices in Fortnite and Rocket League

The Canadian class action settlement against Epic Games for $2.75 million CAD specifically addressed loot box purchases in Fortnite and Rocket League.

Individual payment ranges in this settlement consisted of:

1. Minimal amounts for casual players with limited loot box purchases
2. Several hundred dollars for heavy purchasers with extensive documented spending
3. Cash payments or in-game credits based on documented loot box purchase history
4. Relatively modest per-person recovery due to large class size and focus on purchase reimbursement

If you or a loved one has suffered financial harm from predatory gaming practices or developed gaming addiction, you may be eligible to seek compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation that can determine your eligibility to join others in filing a Video Game Addiction Lawsuit today.

These regulatory and class action outcomes demonstrate gaming companies’ willingness to pay substantial sums to resolve claims related to potentially harmful design practices, even when the specific legal theories differ from individual addiction cases.

The precedent value of these settlements extends beyond their monetary amounts to establish important legal principles regarding gaming company responsibilities and the validity of claims based on manipulative design features.

Future class action developments in gaming addiction litigation may result in more substantial per-person recoveries if they successfully establish broader liability theories that encompass the full range of addiction-related harms rather than focusing solely on financial losses from specific transactions.

International Settlement Variations and Precedents

European gaming regulation has created more favorable precedent for gaming addiction claims, with several countries implementing strict limitations on loot boxes and requiring addiction warnings for games with potentially harmful design features.

The Netherlands’ successful enforcement actions against several major gaming companies for illegal gambling mechanics resulted in significant financial penalties and game modifications that provide precedent for broader gaming company liability.

Belgium’s classification of certain loot box mechanics as illegal gambling has resulted in multiple gaming companies modifying their products or withdrawing them from the Belgian market entirely, demonstrating the economic pressure that effective regulation can create.

These international precedents suggest that gaming companies recognize substantial liability exposure related to addictive design features and are willing to incur significant costs to address regulatory concerns.

The stronger consumer protection frameworks in many European jurisdictions may result in higher settlement amounts for gaming addiction cases in those markets, though currency considerations and different legal fee structures complicate direct comparisons with U.S. outcomes.

However, the willingness of major gaming companies to modify popular games or pay substantial regulatory penalties internationally suggests that similar liability theories may prove successful in U.S. litigation, potentially supporting higher settlement amounts than current estimates suggest.

International regulatory developments also influence U.S. settlement negotiations by establishing precedent for gaming company’ knowledge of addictive potential and demonstrating that effective regulation is possible, countering industry arguments that addictive design features are inevitable or technologically necessary.

Gaming addiction lawsuit settlements encompass multiple distinct categories of compensation that reflect the comprehensive impact these conditions can have on individuals and families.

These compensation categories can help plaintiffs identify all possible areas of recovery and ensures that settlement negotiations address the full scope of addiction-related harm.

Each category requires specific documentation and evidence to support recovery claims, with settlement amounts varying significantly based on the severity of impact within each category.

The most successful cases typically demonstrate harm across multiple compensation categories, creating a comprehensive picture of addiction-related damage that justifies higher settlement amounts.

Medical and Treatment Cost Recovery

Medical expense recovery represents one of the most straightforward categories in gaming addiction settlements, covering both past treatment costs and future medical needs related to addiction recovery.

Legal experts allege specific features are engineered to exploit vulnerable players:

• Loot Box Systems: Randomized reward mechanics mimicking slot machines, triggering gambling-like responses in developing brains
• Variable Ratio Reinforcement: Unpredictable reward schedules designed by behavioral psychologists to maximize engagement and spending
• Pay-to-Win Progression: Artificial difficulty spikes forcing players to purchase power-ups or face hours of repetitive grinding

Future treatment cost projections require expert medical testimony to establish ongoing recovery needs.

Many gaming addiction cases involve co-occurring mental health conditions that expand the scope of recoverable medical expenses.

These conditions may include:

1. Depression requiring specialized psychiatric treatment and medication
2. Anxiety disorders needing cognitive behavioral therapy and ongoing support
3. ADHD requiring comprehensive evaluation and treatment coordination
4. Family therapy costs for addressing relationship damage and establishing healthy technology boundaries

Insurance coverage considerations significantly impact net recovery amounts in gaming addiction cases.

Coverage limitations that often result in substantial out-of-pocket expenses consist of:

• Limited coverage for behavioral addiction treatment under many health insurance plans
• Policy exclusions for certain types of addiction treatment or residential programs
• Exhausted insurance benefits requiring continued self-pay treatment
• Gaps in coverage for family therapy and comprehensive addiction treatment approaches

If your family has incurred significant treatment costs for gaming addiction, you may be eligible to seek compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation and determine whether you qualify to join others in filing a video game addiction lawsuit today.

Lost Income and Career Damage Calculations

Lost income calculations in gaming addiction cases require a comprehensive analysis of both immediate wage losses and long-term career damage resulting from addiction-related behavior.

Immediate wage losses include documentation of termination, suspension, or demotion directly attributable to gaming addiction interfering with work performance, attendance, or professional conduct.

Time-based income losses are calculated as hourly wages multiplied by documented work hours missed due to excessive gaming, with particular attention to overtime opportunities and bonus payments that may have been forfeited.

Long-term earning capacity assessments address the more substantial impacts of gaming addiction on career trajectory and lifetime earning potential.

Educational disruption damages apply particularly to younger plaintiffs whose addiction interfered with academic achievement, delayed graduation, or resulted in dropped courses that impacted career preparation.

Professional licensing or certification impacts create additional categories of career damage in cases where gaming addiction resulted in professional disciplinary action, license suspension, or inability to complete required continuing education.

Cases involving healthcare professionals, lawyers, teachers, or other licensed professionals may command higher settlements due to the enhanced earning potential associated with these careers and the difficulty of recovering professional standing after addiction-related disciplinary action.

Self-employment and entrepreneurial income losses present unique calculation challenges but may result in substantial recovery amounts when documented through business records, tax returns, and expert analysis of lost business opportunities.

Gaming addiction’s impact on client relationships, business development, and project completion can create quantifiable losses that extend well beyond traditional employment scenarios.

Quality of Life and Relationship Damage Valuations

Quality of life damages in gaming addiction cases address the profound personal and social impacts that extend beyond measurable economic losses.

Social isolation damages recognize how gaming addiction typically involves withdrawal from real-world relationships, hobbies, and activities that previously provided meaning and satisfaction.

Documentation for these claims includes evidence of abandoned friendships, discontinued participation in sports or extracurricular activities, and decreased involvement in family or community events.

Relationship damage calculations encompass impacts on romantic partnerships, family relationships, and parental bonds that result from gaming addiction’s time consumption and behavioral changes.

Marital counseling costs, divorce expenses, and custody evaluation fees qualify for reimbursement when gaming addiction contributes to relationship breakdown.

Family therapy documentation helps establish the broader impact of gaming addiction on household functioning and the recovery process required to restore healthy relationships.

Developmental milestone losses apply particularly to younger plaintiffs whose addiction occurred during formative periods of social, emotional, and intellectual development.

Missing prom, graduation ceremonies, college experiences, or career-building opportunities during peak developmental years can justify substantial compensation based on the irreplaceable nature of these experiences and their impact on adult functioning and self-esteem.

The calculation of these non-economic damages often employs multiplier methods where documented economic losses are multiplied by factors ranging from 1.5 to 4, depending on the severity and duration of impact.

Cases involving multiple quality of life impacts, extended addiction periods, or particular severity in social functioning may warrant higher multipliers.

Expert testimony from psychologists, addiction specialists, and family therapists provides professional validation of these impacts and helps establish appropriate compensation levels for non-economic damages.

Successful gaming addiction lawsuits require strategic case development that increases settlement value through comprehensive documentation, expert support, and strategic timing.

Building a strong case involves collecting evidence that demonstrates both the addictive design features of specific games and the causal relationship between those features and the plaintiff’s documented harm.

The strength of available evidence directly impacts settlement negotiations, with well-documented cases commanding significantly higher settlement offers than those lacking comprehensive proof of addiction and damages.

Confidentiality Clauses and Their Impact on Settlement Amounts

Confidentiality provisions in gaming addiction settlements create tension between the plaintiff privacy interests and public accountability for gaming industry practices.

Gaming companies typically offer premium settlement amounts in exchange for confidentiality agreements that prevent plaintiffs from discussing settlement terms, case facts, or gaming company conduct.

These confidentiality premiums may range from 15% to 30% above base settlement offers, reflecting the substantial value companies place on preventing public disclosure of addiction-related liability.

Confidentiality scope varies significantly among settlement agreements, with some restricting only financial terms while others broadly prohibit discussion of addiction experiences, treatment needs, or gaming company conduct.

Plaintiffs should carefully evaluate confidentiality restrictions against their desire to warn others about addictive gaming products or participate in advocacy efforts regarding gaming addiction prevention and treatment.

Enforcement considerations affect the practical impact of confidentiality clauses, as gaming companies may be reluctant to pursue breach of contract litigation that could result in additional public attention to addiction-related conduct.

However, substantial liquidated damages provisions in confidentiality agreements create meaningful financial incentives for compliance, and violations could result in forfeiture of settlement payments or additional financial penalties.

Regulatory reporting exceptions in confidentiality agreements may permit disclosure to government agencies investigating gaming industry practices while maintaining general public confidentiality.

These provisions allow plaintiffs to cooperate with regulatory investigations while preserving the confidentiality value to gaming companies, creating balanced arrangements that serve both plaintiff and defendant interests.

The evolving landscape of gaming technology, regulatory oversight, and legal precedent suggests that settlement values in gaming addiction cases will likely increase substantially over the next several years.

Emerging technologies including virtual reality, augmented reality, and artificial intelligence-driven engagement systems create new categories of addictive potential that may result in higher settlement values due to their enhanced immersive capabilities and sophisticated user manipulation techniques.

Regulatory developments at both federal and state levels are creating a more favorable legal environment for gaming addiction claims, while growing scientific knowledge of behavioral addiction mechanisms strengthens the evidentiary foundation for these cases.

Impact of New Gaming Technologies on Future Settlements

Virtual reality and augmented reality gaming technologies present unprecedented addictive potential due to their immersive nature and ability to create more compelling alternative realities that compete with real-world engagement.

Early research suggests that VR gaming addiction may develop more rapidly and with greater intensity than traditional gaming addiction, potentially supporting higher settlement amounts due to the accelerated timeline and enhanced severity of addiction development.

The sensory immersion and physical engagement required by VR systems create additional categories of potential harm including physical injury, spatial disorientation, and enhanced social isolation that may expand the scope of recoverable damages.

Artificial intelligence-driven engagement systems represent a significant escalation in the sophistication of addictive design features, using machine learning algorithms to personalize addiction triggers and optimize individual player engagement patterns.

These AI systems can analyze player behavior in real-time and adjust game features, rewards, and social interactions to increase addictive potential for each user.

The deliberate and personalized nature of AI-driven addiction may support higher settlement amounts and increased punitive damage awards due to the enhanced culpability associated with individually targeted manipulation.

Cross-platform gaming addiction involving multiple devices, games, and social networks creates multipart liability scenarios that may increase total settlement amounts through joint and several liability theories.

Modern gaming ecosystems often involve multiple companies sharing user data and coordinating engagement strategies across different platforms, creating opportunities for plaintiffs to pursue claims against multiple defendants and potentially increasing total recovery amounts through aggregate liability.

Cryptocurrency and NFT gaming mechanics introduce gambling-like elements that may command premium settlement amounts due to the enhanced financial risk and the potential for substantial monetary losses beyond traditional in-game purchases.

The volatile nature of cryptocurrency values and the speculative investment aspects of NFT gaming create additional categories of financial harm that may support higher damage calculations and settlement values.

Regulatory Changes Affecting Settlement Landscapes

Federal Trade Commission enforcement activities regarding gaming industry practices are creating a more favorable regulatory environment for gaming addiction litigation, with the agency’s $245 million settlement with Epic Games establishing important precedent for gaming company liability related to manipulative design features.

Ongoing FTC investigations into gaming industry practices focus on multiple areas of concern that may include:

• Loot box mechanics and their similarity to gambling mechanisms
• Dark patterns designed to confuse or manipulate players into unintended purchases
• Targeting practices specifically aimed at minors and vulnerable populations

State-level legislation targeting gaming addiction and predatory monetization is developing rapidly across multiple jurisdictions.

Legislative developments that create legal uncertainty for gaming companies consist of:

1. Bills restricting certain gaming mechanics or requiring addiction warnings
2. Proposed liability frameworks for addiction-related harm
3. Enhanced consumer protection laws specific to gaming industry practices
4. Age verification and parental consent requirements for gaming platforms

International regulatory coordination through organizations like the European Commission is creating global pressure for gaming industry reform.

European restrictions and enforcement actions have been discovered nationwide within close proximity to:

• Loot box restrictions that have forced major gaming companies to modify popular games
• Aggressive enforcement of consumer protection laws with substantial financial penalties
• Global precedents that influence U.S. regulatory approaches and business practices
• Cross-border coordination on gaming addiction research and policy development

Age verification and parental consent requirements being implemented in various jurisdictions create new categories of potential liability for gaming companies that fail to protect minors adequately.

Enhanced legal protections for children in gaming environments may result in higher settlement amounts for cases involving minor plaintiffs and increased scrutiny of gaming company practices regarding youth engagement and monetization.

Insurance Coverage Evolution for Gaming Addiction Claims

Product liability insurance coverage for gaming companies is evolving to address gaming addiction claims, with insurers developing new policy language and exclusions that specifically address behavioral addiction risks.

The availability and scope of insurance coverage significantly influences gaming companies’ settlement strategies, with comprehensive coverage enabling higher settlement offers while coverage gaps or exclusions may limit settlement amounts or create pressure for early resolution before coverage issues become apparent.

Cyber liability insurance policies are beginning to address gaming addiction claims as a category of technology-related harm, though coverage scope remains inconsistent across insurers and policy types.

The development of specialized gaming industry insurance products may result in more predictable coverage for addiction-related claims, potentially stabilizing settlement amounts and creating more consistent negotiation frameworks.

Directors and officers liability coverage for gaming company executives may become increasingly important as regulatory scrutiny intensifies and shareholder litigation related to gaming addiction liability emerges.

The potential for personal liability among gaming company leadership could create additional settlement pressures and influence corporate decision-making regarding addiction-related business practices.

The emerging nature of gaming addiction liability means that insurance coverage disputes may become more common as claims volumes increase, potentially creating delays in settlement negotiations while coverage issues are resolved.

However, the development of clearer coverage frameworks and industry-specific policies may ultimately result in more efficient settlement processes and more predictable outcome ranges for gaming addiction litigation.

Our Video Game Addiction attorney at TruLaw is dedicated to supporting clients through the process of filing a Video Game Addiction lawsuit.

With extensive experience in product liability cases, Jessica Paluch-Hoerman and our partner law firms work with litigation leaders and mental health professionals to prove how video games with deliberately addictive features caused you harm.

TruLaw focuses on securing compensation for mental health treatment expenses, academic and career setbacks, family relationship damages, and other losses resulting from your video game addiction injuries.

We know the psychological and social toll that Video Game Addiction issues have on your life and provide the personalized guidance you need when seeking justice.

Meet the Lead Video Game Addiction Attorney at TruLaw

Meet our lead Video Game Addiction attorney:

• Jessica Paluch-Hoerman: As founder and managing attorney of TruLaw, Jessica brings her experience in product liability and personal injury to her client-centered approach by prioritizing open communication and personalized attention with her clients. Through TruLaw and partner law firms, Jessica has helped collect over $3 billion on behalf of injured individuals across all 50 states through verdicts and negotiated settlements.

How much does hiring a Video Game Addiction lawyer from TruLaw cost?

At TruLaw, we believe financial concerns should never stand in the way of justice.

That’s why we operate on a contingency fee basis—with this approach, you only pay legal fees after you’ve been awarded compensation for your injuries.

If you or a loved one experienced addiction, depression, sleep disorders, social isolation, or other mental health issues from excessive video game use, you may be eligible to seek compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation and determine whether you qualify to join others in filing a Video Game Addiction Lawsuit today.

Video game addiction lawsuits are being filed by individuals and families across the country who suffered mental health injuries and addiction from video games designed with manipulative features.

TruLaw is currently accepting clients for the video game addiction lawsuit.

A few reasons to choose TruLaw for your video game addiction lawsuit include:

• If We Don’t Win, You Don’t Pay: The video game addiction lawyers at TruLaw and our partner firms operate on a contingency fee basis, meaning we only get paid if you win.
• Expertise: We have decades of experience handling consumer protection cases similar to the video game addiction lawsuit.
• Successful Track Record: TruLaw and our partner law firms have helped our clients recover billions of dollars in compensation through verdicts and negotiated settlements.

If you or a loved one suffered from video game addiction or related mental health problems, you may be eligible to seek compensation.

Contact TruLaw using the chat on this page to receive an instant case evaluation that can determine if you qualify for the video game addiction lawsuit today.