A federal jury in Miami has found Elon Musk’s Tesla partly at fault in a federal lawsuit over a 2019 Autopilot crash in Florida that left a young woman dead and her boyfriend badly hurt. The jury awarded the plaintiffs $200 million in punitive damages along with compensatory damages.
CNBC reports that Elon Musk’s Tesla has been found partly at fault in a personal injury trial over a fatal Autopilot crash that occurred in Florida in 2019. The case, being heard in the Southern District of Florida, marks the first time Tesla has been in front of a jury in federal court over allegations related to the safety of its Autopilot system.
The plaintiffs’ attorneys had asked the jury to award damages of approximately $345 million, which includes $109 million in compensatory damages and $236 million in punitive damages. Based on the jury’s finding that Tesla held one-third of the blame for the accident, they award $200 million in punitive damages along with compensatory damages.
The lawsuit centers around a deadly crash that took place in Key Largo, Florida, involving a Tesla Model S electric sedan driven by George McGee. At the time of the incident, McGee was using Tesla’s Enhanced Autopilot, a partially automated driving system.
According to court testimony, McGee dropped his mobile phone while driving and attempted to retrieve it, believing that Enhanced Autopilot would brake if an obstacle was in the way. However, he accelerated through an intersection at just over 60 miles per hour, colliding with a nearby parked car and its owners, who were standing on the other side of their vehicle.
The crash resulted in the death of 22-year-old Naibel Benavides, who was found about 75 feet away from the point of impact. Her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, survived but suffered multiple broken bones, a traumatic brain injury, and psychological effects. The plaintiffs in the case include Benavides’ surviving family members and Angulo, who are seeking compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering, and wrongful death, as well as punitive damages.
The plaintiffs’ lawyers argued that Tesla’s partially automated driving systems had dangerous defects that should have been known and addressed by the company. They also claimed that the use of Autopilot should have been restricted to roads where it could perform safely. Furthermore, the attorneys alleged that Musk and Tesla made false statements to customers, shareholders, and the public, exaggerating the safety benefits and capabilities of Autopilot, which encouraged drivers to overly rely on the system.
In response, Tesla’s attorneys countered that the company had directly communicated with customers about the proper use of Autopilot and other features, and that McGee’s driving was the primary cause of the collision. They emphasized that Tesla works to develop technology to save drivers’ lives and that a ruling against the EV maker would send the wrong message.
Breitbart News previously reported that a safety expert that testified at the trial was critical of Elon Musk’s “Autopilot” and self driving technology:
According to Cummings, Tesla’s owner’s manual, which contains crucial warnings about the Autopilot system’s functionality, is not easily accessible to drivers. She also pointed out that Tesla had been grappling with drivers ignoring computer-generated warnings prior to the crash. Cummings noted that the company had not implemented geo-fencing, a technology already in use by other car manufacturers to prevent drivers from activating driver-assistance features on roads unsuitable for such systems.
When asked by Brett Schreiber, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, about Tesla’s decision not to use geo-fencing in 2019, Cummings responded, “I believe they were using that as a way to sell more cars.” Cummings, who previously served as a senior adviser at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), is expected to face questioning from Tesla’s lawyers when she returns to the witness stand.
Read more at CNBC here.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship.
