ChatGPT Lawsuit Filed by FSU Shooting Victim Says OpenAI Helped Student Plan Attack

Lawsuit alleges OpenAI rushed GPT-4o to market, compressing months of planned safety testing into about one week, while diminishing safeguards against dangerous requests.

A Florida State University shooting victim has filed a lawsuit alleging ChatGPT helped a student plan the April 2025 attack by providing information about firearms and when the campus student union would be busiest.

Alianna Grant brought the complaint (PDF) in Florida state court on June 25, naming OpenAI Inc., OpenAI OpCo LLC, OpenAI Holdings LLC, OpenAI Group PBC and OpenAI CEO Samuel Altman as defendants. The case was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida on September 17.  

Grant was one of the victims of the April 17, 2025, mass shooting at FSU, during which student Phoenix Ikner opened fire near the Student Union. She was struck by three bullets and claims she suffered severe and permanent physical injuries, emotional distress and other damages.

ChatGPT Mental Health Risks

ChatGPT is one of a growing number of large language model (LLM) chatbots that have gained widespread use for their ability to answer questions, assist with everyday tasks and engage users in extended conversations. Some users also interact with AI chatbots in ways that resemble virtual companionship.

As conversational AI has become more common, the technology has also drawn increased legal and ethical scrutiny, leading to lawsuits against companies that develop and operate the systems.

The latest case comes amid a series of ChatGPT mental health lawsuits against OpenAI, including a wrongful death claim alleging the chatbot assisted a teenager in planning his suicide. Separate research has also raised concerns about whether some AI models can be prompted into providing minors with detailed information about self-harm.

ChatGPT Shooting Lawsuit Allegations

According to Grant’s lawsuit, Ikner used ChatGPT as an outlet for his thoughts for nearly a year before the shooting, allegedly discussing social isolation, extremist views and suicidal thoughts. He also asked about the Oklahoma City bombing and how to make a Molotov cocktail.

About a month before the attack, his questions allegedly became increasingly focused on violence, including terrorism and the death tolls from the Virginia Tech and Columbine school shootings.

The lawsuit claims those questions escalated further on the day of the FSU shooting, when Ikner asked how the country would react to an attack at the university and how many victims would be required to receive significant media coverage.

Ikner subsequently asked about firearms in his possession, including ammunition and safety mechanisms. ChatGPT allegedly provided information about how the weapons operated.

The complaint indicates Ikner also asked about peak hours for the FSU Student Union, and ChatGPT responded that the building was typically busiest between 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. on weekdays. Ikner opened fire at about 11:57 a.m., within the window ChatGPT allegedly identified as the Student Union’s peak occupancy period.

Grant maintains ChatGPT should have recognized the progression of questions as a potential threat based on Ikner’s conversation history and refused further assistance.

The lawsuit alleges OpenAI defectively designed ChatGPT and GPT-4o to prioritize user engagement and compliance over public safety. Grant claims the system was programmed to “assume best intentions” and accumulated sensitive information through its memory feature without adequately assessing risks across multiple conversations.

Grant indicates OpenAI knew ChatGPT could provide firearms and crowd-density information that could be misused but failed to implement adequate safeguards. The lawsuit points to restrictions for certain copyright-protected material as evidence stronger protections were technologically feasible.

The complaint also alleges OpenAI rushed GPT-4o to market in May 2024, compressing months of planned safety evaluations into about one week, and weakened restrictions governing dangerous requests around the time of the model’s launch.

Grant claims these alleged failures allowed ChatGPT to continue responding despite nearly a year of conversations involving suicidal thoughts, violent interests and research into mass shootings.

“As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ negligence, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer severe and permanent injuries, including but not limited to: bodily injury; permanent physical impairment; severe mental anguish and emotional distress; loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life; past and future medical and psychiatric expenses; past and future lost wages and diminished earning capacity; and other economic and non-economic damages.”

— Alianna Grant v. OpenAI Inc. et al.

Grant raises allegations of strict product liability, defective design, failure to warn, negligent design, negligent failure to warn, negligence and aiding and abetting tortious conduct. She is seeking compensatory damages and other relief.

ChatGPT Mental Health Lawsuits

While Grant’s case focuses on allegations that ChatGPT contributed to violence against others, product liability attorneys are also investigating potential lawsuits for individuals and families who believe interactions with an AI chatbot may have contributed to serious mental health problems, including:

• Suicide or attempted suicide
• Suicidal thoughts or self-harm
• Worsening depression
• Mania or psychosis
• Reinforcement of delusions or paranoia
• Dangerous mental health or medical advice
• Emotional dependence on a chatbot
• Encouragement of violent or harmful behavior

ChatGPT injury lawyers are handling claims on a contingency fee basis, meaning there are no legal fees or expenses unless a settlement or jury award is obtained.

Sign up for more legal news that could affect you or your family.