Settlement guide
Check the actual agreement or court record before trusting a payout claim. Game-case orders and purchase refunds do not set your damages.
Updated Oct 4, 20268 sources
See If You Qualify
Free · No obligation · About 2 minutes
Updated Oct 4, 20268 sources
This may apply to you if
These are cited sources. Their inclusion does not imply that they endorse People’s Justice or reviewed this page.
World Health Organization · Publisher of clinical classification guidance
Finding: WHO describes gaming disorder as loss of control, games taking over daily life, and continued play despite harm. Its October 22, 2020 guidance says diagnosis also requires serious harm to daily functioning.
WHO questions and answers on gaming disorder (opens in a new tab) · Oct 22, 2020 · Checked Oct 3, 2026
Karen K. Caldwell · United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · Chair of the Panel listed in this order
Finding: The Panel’s December 10, 2025 order refused to group the gateway-game claims in one federal court. The order concerns case grouping, not a finding that a game caused a child’s harm.
Gateway-game order denying transfer (opens in a new tab) · Dec 10, 2025 · Checked Oct 3, 2026
World Health Organization · 2020
Read the source: WHO guidance on gaming disorder (opens in a new tab) · Checked Oct 3, 2026
Not covered by this case
The process
You answer a few questions
About two minutes. Nothing is sent until you agree on the last step and press submit.
A lawyer looks at it
A lawyer at the firm reads your answers and checks them against the current case criteria.
The firm decides and gets in touch
If the firm takes your case, you get the terms in writing to read before you sign. You can always say no.
The reviewed game-grouping orders do not announce an addiction payout program. They do not prove that no private settlement, an agreement to resolve a claim, exists. A later agreement or result needs its own check.
Ask for the agreement, parties, date and claim type behind a statement about settlement. Do not treat an expected future deal as an announced program. This page supplies no global no-settlement claim.
This guide gives no checked payment range for harm from gaming. The FTC Fortnite program deals with unwanted purchases. Those refunds do not set damages for a health injury.
Keep the source’s legal purpose beside any amount you encounter. Ask whether the number is a program total, an individual payment or merely an estimate. None of those should be substituted for an offer made to your family.
A real agreement would need to explain the covered claim and its payment terms. The reviewed orders do not supply a personal formula. Ask the lawyer to explain the actual offer and any conditions.
Read how the agreement describes the release of claims as well as the money. Ask whether an existing purchase refund or prior agreement affects the issue under review. Do not predict a future payment from an unrelated award.
Ask for the fee and expense terms in writing. The ABA model rule describes written result-based fees and expenses. It does not verify the terms any firm would offer you.
Ask how the fee is calculated, when expenses are deducted and what may remain owed after a loss. Request plain wording and a copy. Do not accept a website slogan as a substitute for the agreement.
This guide gives no checked payment schedule for harm from gaming. FTC expected more refunds after checking claims. That does not prove a later payment occurred or establish an injury settlement, an agreement to resolve a claim.
If you already have a claim, use its actual administrator or lawyer to ask about status. Verify a notice before following instructions or sharing account information. Do not pay a stranger to unlock an alleged award.
An online estimate needs a real basis for the same claim. The reviewed orders give no gaming-injury payment grid. A purchase-refund program cannot supply that missing basis.
Ask for the original record and read what it covers. Treat unverified ranges as unverified rather than choosing a midpoint. A lawyer’s review should focus on your facts, not a promised headline figure.
Ask which firm would review the information and what the next step would be. Read the proposed agreement before accepting representation. No source here verifies a firm’s current acceptance or a promised result.
Ask about existing counsel, deadlines, information sharing and possible expenses. Request a clear explanation of what an inquiry does and does not authorize. No settlement administrator or new payment form is created by this page.
The review is free and private. Asking for it doesn’t commit you to anything.
Ask a law firm to review your caseNo settlement amount or settlement framework has been announced for video game addiction claims in the court orders reviewed here. The federal court panel that groups cases (the JPML) declined to combine video game addiction cases into one federal case in June 2024 and again on December 10, 2025, so there is no video game MDL. So there are no MDL test (bellwether) trials to set benchmarks. Do not rely on an estimated award range. Any outcome would depend on the facts of your case, and a lawyer can tell you what applies.
No one can say. The court orders reviewed here announce no settlement or payment schedule. The federal court panel that groups cases (the JPML) declined to combine video game addiction cases into one federal case in June 2024 and again on December 10, 2025, so there is no video game MDL. Each case moves on its own schedule in the court where it was filed.
No one has published a way to value either kind of claim. There is no video game MDL, and the JPML's June 2024 and December 10, 2025 orders describe the cases before the panel as individual personal injury actions. Whether a school district has a claim of its own is a question for a lawyer.
Checked against 8 primary sources by People's Justice editors · Updated
How we make moneyPeople's Justice research team · Updated Oct 4, 2026