Edelson PC, the legal firm behind the seven lawsuits filed against OpenAI in April on behalf of victims and families connected to the Tumbler Ridge mass shooting, is now adding 30 more complaints this week. The new plaintiffs include teachers, a principal, and students who were present in the school during the attack but were not physically injured.

For the first time, these new filings go beyond allegations of negligence and accuse OpenAI of actively aiding and abetting the mass shooting. This more serious claim requires demonstrating that OpenAI had intent, a higher legal standard that will likely face early challenges aimed at getting the case dismissed. The lawsuits arrive as OpenAI continues to manage the fallout from another high-profile safety incident, where one of its AI models broke out of its sandbox during cybersecurity testing and compromised servers at Hugging Face, a platform that hosts open-source AI models and datasets. OpenAI has also been dealing with multiple lawsuits alleging that ChatGPT's design played a role in users' suicides, violent actions, and serious mental health crises.

The latest wave of complaints, filed in a California court on Tuesday, stems from a school shooting in Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia, Canada, on February 10. On that day, teenager Jesse Van Rootselaar killed her mother and half-brother at home before going to Tumbler Ridge Secondary School, where she killed six more people and wounded dozens of others, ultimately dying by suicide. According to reports, OpenAI staff had been concerned about Van Rootselaar's interactions with ChatGPT, which included discussions about gun violence and guidance on planning an attack. Employees reportedly pushed leaders to inform Canadian law enforcement about the potential for real-world violence, but those leaders chose not to contact authorities. Instead, the company deactivated Van Rootselaar's account, though she quickly created another one.

OpenAI has defended its decision, stating that Van Rootselaar's activity did not meet the company's internal threshold for an "imminent and credible risk" of serious physical harm to others, which would have required reaching out to law enforcement. The new complaints specifically name Chris Lehane, OpenAI's Chief Global Affairs Officer, as the individual who allegedly instructed staff to stand down and avoid contacting authorities. However, the filings do not provide direct evidence of his personal involvement, and OpenAI has denied the claim. Lehane, a seasoned political strategist and crisis communications expert, previously handled damage control for the Clinton administration and worked at Airbnb before joining OpenAI.

The plaintiffs argue that Lehane's background fosters a culture at OpenAI where public relations and reputation management take precedence over safety. "As a result, the decision whether to alert law enforcement to a user planning a mass attack was not made by the trained threat-assessment professionals who urged OpenAI to contact the [Canadian police]. It was made, on information and belief, by Lehane himself, or by someone in his chain of command, and ratified by Sam Altman."

The phrase "on information and belief" is a legal term indicating that the plaintiffs believe the claim to be true based on secondhand information, even though they cannot yet prove it directly. Notably, Lehane is not named as a defendant in the complaints, although OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is, as was the case in the previous seven filings. "We can tell you that we are basing this in part on the org chart, but also our broader investigation, which includes what we have learned about how Lehane operates within the company."

"It is absolutely false to say Chris Lehane was involved with our original referral decision, or that our investigators report to him in any way," Kwon said. "It's also completely untrue to say that the people at the center of these challenging decisions do not prioritize safety, or that there are 'political' or 'public relations' factors at play."

The new complaints also aim to counter OpenAI's earlier defense that it did not alert Canadian authorities to Van Rootselaar's ChatGPT conversations due to concerns about "imminence" and "privacy." The filings highlight an incident in November 2025, when OpenAI locked down its San Francisco offices following an alleged threat from an activist. "Although OpenAI acknowledged there was 'no indication of active threat activity'—and thus no indication of an 'imminent' attack—the company… immediately locked down its offices, warned employees, distributed the suspect's name and photograph, and notified the San Francisco Police Department," one complaint reads. "When its own people were at risk, no 'privacy' interest stopped OpenAI from notifying the police or circulating the man's name and photograph to thousands of employees. Nor did it wait for the attack to become imminent because it recognized that waiting would jeopardize employee safety."